Obama's to Fix

New York Times -

Nov-07-2009

Obama's to Fix

(topic overview)
CONTENTS:

There will be much discussion years from now about how Barack Obama fared as the first African American President. (More...)
Republicans expressed more confidence in Bernanke to recommend the right thing for the economy from 2006 to 2008 while Bush was in office, but after the change in administrations, that pattern reversed and now Democrats are much more confident in Bernanke. (More...)
In 1989, the Republicans continued control of the White House with George H. W. Bush's presidency. (More...)
There is no way that the guy after Bush who successfully revived the economy and dealt efficiently with the wars is not getting re-elected. (More...)
Obama's most recent bout of stupidity occurred a few days ago with the campaign blitz for Governor Corzine of New Jersey. (More...)
I don't think Obama knows the right answer on Afghanistan; I'm not sure anybody does. (More...)
Obama's plan is to slowly take away your choices by making everyone dependent on the governmentcreating a Socialistic Government in 4 short years. (More...)
The Congress just moved a bit to the left, with Pelosi picking up another vote for national healthcare. (More...)
We have seen what appeasement has done in the past for dictators that have chosen torture and violence as a means of intimidation. (More...)
Obama also signed into law the Omnibus Public Lands Management Act of 2009 that protected thousands of miles of scenic, historic and recreational trails, including the 807-mile Arizona National Scenic Trail from the state line with Mexico to the Utah border. (More...)
"The soft bigotry of low expectations" needs to be reversed in our public schools. (More...)
I think part of the solution for democrats and the administration is to do something big. (More...)
The relief was great that George W. Bush, one of America's most globally unpopular leaders, was leaving. (More...)
Europe thinks, because we have a president who wants the U.S. to emulate European socialism, the U.S. is now a better place. (More...)
I take no pleasure in harboring malcontent toward the president of the United States. (More...)
I'd be willing to bet turnout is nearly always much lower in these odd year Virginia contests than it is in presidential races. (More...)
Somewhere there are people that think because there are Christians that bomb/kill abortion doctors we need to keep an eye on all Christian nuts in the Army. (More...)
Yes my wise and educated friend, (who can'''t spell or compose a sentence) (and believes a party that has lied to it'''s supporters for many years in a bait and switch scheme) you are on a level much higher than I and have demonstrated it well. (More...)
The rest of us will work to restore fiscal sanity to government, which means a lot of liberals (Democrats AND Republicans) are going to get thrown out of office. (More...)

SOURCES

FIND OUT MORE ON THIS SUBJECT

There will be much discussion years from now about how Barack Obama fared as the first African American President. His successes and failures will be tied to the economy, the outcomes of wars, and whether he delivered on social changes he promised. These are very complex issues which don't allow cut and dry assessments of his individual performance. Just as you can't appraise a quarterback simply by his team's wins and losses, a President's effectiveness has to be placed in context. In the current context, the sitting President's party has super-majorities in both houses of Congress. He was elected by a populace which greatly disapproved of the previous administration, and was more afraid of staying on the same path than trying something new. Despite the stars aligning for Obama to be elected and have just about any idea embraced by the masses, if only because he isn't Bush, his initiative has been sorely lacking. To achieve a goal, the first thing a politician needs is to win his desired office. This is stating the obvious, but the implications of completing this first step affect everything that follows. [1] Jerry Knight would like us to believe after nine months Barack Obama's presidency is a "disaster." Let's review what Obama faced when he took office, shall we? The worst economy since the Great Depression, not one but two wars, America's reputation tarnished all over the world, a completely inept federal response to Hurricane Katrina and millions more Americans without health care than there were nine years ago. It was announced last week that the economy grew for the first time in over a year. Is that merely a coincidence? Or did the Obama administration actually keep the American economy from slipping further into the abyss.[2]

MADISON, Wis. This time last year, Galen Milchman was celebrating the election of Barack Obama to the White House, a victory he had worked for and believed would change the world. Today, the 19-year-old pizza deliveryman is wondering what happened to the transformation he thought would have come by now. "It's not all up to the president, I know that," he said. "But the Democrats are in control of the House and the Senate, and so we were going to get all this change. Where is it? It makes me feel very cynical." A year after hopeful liberals and young people demanding "change" helped Obama win the White House, some of them say they are feeling somewhat deflated. The universal health care they wanted isn't looking so universal. They haven't seen dramatic action to slow climate change. Instead of dialing down the U.S. commitment to war, they're hearing talk of escalation.[3] No matter whose fault you think it was to cause the economic problems, the war in Afghanistan, or Iraq. They are Obama's to solve. On those issues alone, how is he doing? Well I believe he is in rival with Jimmy Carter for the worst president in modern history. He is bent on health care and climate change. The people of the nation are scared of the economy, putting food on their table, getting or keeping a job. Obama's response? He saved or created jobs that no one can come up with the same math the White House uses.[4]

Nearly every problem in America - the economy, health care, financial regulatory reform, Afghanistan, Iraq and Guantanamo - is being blamed on Mr. Bush. White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel recently hinted on CNN that Mr. Obama's indecision regarding sending more troops to Afghanistan was caused by his predecessor's inept policies. "It's clear that basically we had a war for eight years that was going on, that's adrift," Mr. Emanuel said. "That we're beginning at scratch, and just from the starting point, after eight years." The same perverse logic applies to the protracted recession.[5]

In eight years, Bush probably bit on shouted questions fewer than a dozen times. President Obama is sometimes game for shouted questions. Whether he responds seems to depend on a combination of his mood and the topic. He ignored efforts by reporters to draw him out on Afghan elections. He said, "Good try" to a reporter shouting one about the elections. Today, he twice ignored shouted questions about whether he endorses the House version of the health care reform bill. In September, at the end of a Cabinet meeting, he got a shouted question about whether he accepted Rep. Joe Wilson's apology for calling him a liar during an address to Congress. Obama said he did and actually talked about it for a few minutes.[6] The race to 218 -- or more: Tomorrow night, the House is expected to vote on the Democrats' health care bill. From now until then, Speaker Nancy Pelosi's goal -- as well as President Obama'''s -- will be this: getting at least 218 votes.[7]

The president sent more than 20,000 more troops to Afghanistan and is considering sending more. He has ordered the Guantanamo Bay prison closed, though he's likely to miss his self-imposed January deadline. On the domestic side, two issues have dominated the first 10 months of the Obama era -- health care and the economy -- and the president can claim progress on both. The economy was stoked by a nearly $800 billion stimulus bill, which he promised "will likely save or create 3 to 4 million jobs; 90 percent of these jobs will be created in the private sector."[8] Not on a health care system that scares the crap out of the moderates. Moderates will vote to with their pocket book over social issues when it comes to taxes. They voted for Obama for two reasons. 1. Bush tanked the economy with the war and looked insensitive with Katrina by giving the appearance of only appointing his friends and not people who do the job when needed. 2. Sarah Palin looked like a nut job on social issues and looked liked another Bush that would take care of her own.[4] The economy is getting better which I am actually seeing in my business. The real problem is that companies are waiting for someone to tell them to spend money or using this mess as a disaster to cut costs while lining their pockets which not Obama's fault. I also think people are missing his wins here. Iraqi will be over soon, he passed legislation to make sure the economy didn't crash and he just picked up another house seat this week. His real problem is a Congress that has no spine and worried too much about elections a year away then anything else. Once Health Care is passed, he can move on to other bigger problems. Yes, Health Care will get passed while the teabaggers cry all the way to paying less for their insurance.[1] I don't think it is the economy which is the main cause of Dem. failure in Va. and N.J., it is the proposed health care bill and cap and trade bill which drive the middle and upper class people and the seniors so scared that the Dem. leadership is a sort of monster, which could affect their lives much more than what Bush did in his eight years, except the economic meltdown at the end of his terms.[9] Hmmm yes the economy has something to do with it.But I think its POLOCIES as a whole. One of these days you will get it. The people dont want all these massive TAX polocies (Health Care, Cap & Trade, Etc.) Its my understanding that we all cant go to washington so we choose someone who will represent our voices. Then they go to Congress or the Senate and work for the will of those people. When the leader of teh country and the leader of the Democtatic party is telling those elected (who are OUR voice) that they need to pass bills (Health Care) even if it means that they willbe voted out should sum things up for YOU. We the PEOPLE are no longer being REPRESENTED. So it is not a surprise to me that this is just the beggining of a power shift. I dont care if there Dems, Repubs, Or Ind.If they are not there to represent the will of the people then its time for them to pack there bags.[9]

Every politician promises things that they don't deliver, unfortunately it seems to be a part of the game. I think he's done a fair jobnot spectacular, not horrible. Unemployment is the biggest issue in this country right now, IMO. They say the economy has improved, but this is only because businesses are getting into the black by cutting employees and forcing retirements. It's nice to see the stocks go up, but the unemployment rate is a little alarming. He hasn't really created the permanent jobs he talked about. I'm with LarryNative on the troop issueit would be nice to see more of them coming home, but I realize you can't just pull everyone at the drop of a hat. Although nothing's been done about health car yet, I think he's done a masterful job of getting the entire country talking and thinking about it. Even though his public option may never pass, I think people on both sides of the aisle can agree that some type of reform to the health care system is overdue. He hasn't even been in office for a yearI'm optimistic about the next three.[4] "The work continues, but we are moving in the right direction," Obama pledged at a speech to a school in northern Wisconsin. "And we are going to keep on fulfilling our obligation to do every single thing we possibly can to pull this economy out of the ditch and to make sure that people can find jobs that pay good wages. That's our top priority." On November 4, 2008 Obama turned a page in American history when he became the first African American to be voted into the Oval Office, defeating veteran senator and staunch Republican John McCain. "One year ago, Americans all across this country went to the polls and cast ballots for the future they wanted to see," he told the crowd in the Madison school, which leapt to its feet in a standing ovation.[10] '''President Obama came into office with a strong mandate and proclaimed the need to take bold action on the economy. His actual actions, however, were cautious rather than bold. They were enough to pull the economy back from the brink, but not enough to bring unemployment down.''' Stepping on the NY-23 narrative: Turning to Tuesday'''s elections, Republicans have had two very good stories to talk about (New Jersey and Virginia) and one they really don'''t want to discuss (NY-23). What did some of their leaders do yesterday? They stepped right on the NY-23 narrative. First was the thousands-strong Tea Party rally/protest/press conference on Capitol Hill -- attended by GOP congressional leaders -- which only furthered the perception (true or not) that the GOP has become captive to its conservative base.[7] The Republican candidate for governor drew 60 percent of independents in New Jersey and 66 percent in Virginia. In the presidential election last year, Obama had won both states. The conundrum for Democrats is especially obvious here, the liberal bastion around the University of Wisconsin-Madison, where Obama chose to mark the one-year anniversary of his election Wednesday with an appearance. On campus described by one Wisconsin politician as an isthmus of liberalism surrounded by reality students and other young voters said they see a dwindling of enthusiasm. Will Bradley, a senior in Spanish and economics, said he likes much of what he says is Obama's pragmatic, methodical approach to passing his agenda. Bradley said, "he does need to come through on what he promised." Milchman, who moved to Madison from Vermont this year, said he doesn't feel angry about the lack of change, just disappointed by it. "I'm just not that impressed by how things are going," he said. "It's not that I would go vote for some other party. It's just that I feel disheartened about the whole thing." That speaks to the potential threat for Democrats, said Charles Franklin, political scientist and pollster at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Obama won in 2008 by turning out young and minority voters, and a drop-off in enthusiasm is a problem if it means a drop-off in their motivation to vote.[3] Mr Obama should be the last person to be surprised by the Republican resurgence, as the results of the recent state elections across the U.S. show. The Democrats have not only performed dismally, losing important gubernatorial posts in Virginia and New Jersey, but their defeats have also cost their president dearly. Since his inauguration in January this year, Mr Obama's approval ratings have been going down from an initial whopping 70 per cent. In July, his ratings were worse than what George W. Bush had enjoyed in the same period of his own presidency.[11] PRINCETON, NJ -- As President Obama nears an important decision on U.S. troop levels in Afghanistan, Americans rate one of his key military advisers, Defense Secretary Robert Gates, much more positively than negatively. Forty-nine percent of Americans have a favorable opinion of Gates while 19% view him unfavorably. One in three Americans are not familiar enough with Gates to rate him. "Despite his long service to Republican presidents, Gates receives a more positive review from Democrats than from Republicans." These results are based on the Oct. 16-19 USA Today/ Gallup poll. This is the first Gallup reading on public opinion of Gates, who served as George W. Bush's defense secretary in the latter part of his administration and whom Obama asked to remain in that role in his new administration.[12] Gates himself is a Republican who not only served under George W. Bush but was deputy national security adviser and then CIA director under George H.W. Bush. Despite his long service to Republican presidents, Gates receives a more positive review from Democrats than from Republicans. This suggests that Gates' status as an Obama administration official is more influential than his political affiliation or prior service in how people view him. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke has also served under both Bush and Obama, and Gallup observed an abrupt shift in how confident Republicans and Democrats were in his economic leadership after the change in administrations.[12]

Klein's revelations were confirmed by former NSA analyst and whistleblower Russell Tice, who told MSNBC's Countdown with Keith Olbermann in January that the NSA "had access to all Americans' communications" and spied "24/7" on domestic political activist groups and "U.S. news organizations and reporters and journalists." In demanding that the independent federal judiciary toss these cases, the Obama administration is asserting a broad interpretation of Executive Branch privileges that caused much outrage and hand-wringing by congressional Democrats--when they were out of power. Under the "change" regime however, what were once viewed by Democrats and their supporters as prime examples of Bushist lawlessness and contempt for constitutional safeguards, are now deemed vital state secrets that "protect" the American people, even as the capitalist state wages an endless "War on Terror" to seize other people's resources for geostrategic advantage over the competition. That was the principal authoritarian instrument used by Bush/Cheney to shield itself from judicial accountability, and it is now the instrument used by the Obama DOJ to do the same.[13] Mr Obama's unspoken hopes to raise revenue via a new value added tax or carbon taxes will have to remain unspoken until incomes revive. Don't despair, British Obama fans! The irony is that the thwarting of his domestic programme may be the indispensable precondition of a successful Obama presidency. My European co-panellists were not wrong to see Mr Obama as a transformational figure despite his thin record. He has made a huge change in the way people around the world think and feel about the U.S. -- and in how many alienated younger Americans think and feel about their own country. He is a walking, talking refutation of every defamation ever concocted by the enemies of U.S. democracy, the best salesman since John F. Kennedy. He appeals not only because of his multi-ethnic, multicultural origins (although those certainly do not hurt), but because of his respectful, deliberative style. This face from the human future has tethered himself to policies from the dead statist past. To date, Mr Obama has not fulfilled his own potential -- or delivered the presidency America needs. A dose of chastening defeat may prove the salvation of this presidency. Salvation or not, a dose of defeat is what this new, young President is already tasting.[14] I''''''''''''''''''d like to like my own president. I''''''''''''''''''ve never had respect for the people who hated George W. Bush and I always felt their disrespect toward him was irrational. This past weekend, I carefully thought about why I disliked President Obama so much and I realized it''''''''''''''''''s because I see a systematic attempt to keep his campaign promise to ''''''''''''''''fundamentally change America.''''''''''''''''' That frightens me because although I think America needs some changes, I don''''''''''''''''''t think America needs fundamental change.[15] The effort that Obama made to patch up the damage overseas done by Bush's unilateralist foreign policy approach would never please any righty. That's because you can't UNDERSTAND it, you never shared your toys when you were a kid and you were the neighborhood bully. When Bush broke the law by invading Iraq, people in the world took notice that the U.S. was an actual threat to them rather than a boogyman threat like "terrissts". That's why the U.S. ranked high on the list of rogue states in an international poll taken by Pew in 2005. Trying to fix that is "blaming America"? No, it's repudiating the illegal actions of a President who should be impeached, convicted, and imprisoned for war crimes.[16] The danger that Obama dissenters face is becoming just as irrational and unfair as the people who blindly hated Bush and no president deserves that. At this moment, President Obama is considering launching a "surge" in Afghanistan -- a successful Bush strategy that turned the war in Iraq toward victory. Whether he launches a surge or withdraws troops completely, either decision would be an improvement over the current state of affairs. If he takes decisive action based on what''''''''''''''''''s right for America as opposed to gaining political support then he should be applauded.[15]

Even a Nobel laureate might end up feeling miserable, especially if he happens to be the president of the United States of America. What good is a peace prize given by a Swedish committee when people at home consider their president's party unworthy of their vote? Barack Obama,'surprised and humbled' by the Nobel peace prize, justified the honour as 'a call to action'. He need not have waited that long. It has been a year since Americans have elected their first black president. In these 12 months, Mr Obama has made too many tall promises and delivered too little on the ground.[11] "Change" and "reform" are great buzzwords that most people want, but many differ on what type of change or reform needs to occur? Any change at one position in government that is not accompanied by someone of a similar stripe at other positions, means that the "change" won't happen. I did not vote for Barack Obama, and disagree with several of his ideas. I also feel his biggest obstacle has been and will continue to be his own party. Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid made statements early on that they wanted the President to follow their agenda, and would not follow his unless it walked lockstep with theirs. It is that sort of "me first" grandstanding that holds up any reform no matter what the level of government. Until Pelosi and Reid are out of his way, his plans will not succeed because they will defeat him faster than the Republicans.[1]

This morning, President Obama made an appearance in the White House Rose Garden to provide remarks about the new unemployment numbers and the tragedy at Fort Hood. This time, Fort Hood came first. At around 5 p.m., President Obama stepped to the podium at the Tribal Nations Conference at the Department of the Interior and offered thanks to various officials for their participation. He then gave a "shout out" and a little wave to Dr. Joe Medicine Crow, a Congressional Medal of Honor winner. Then he spoke about continuing a dialogue with Native Americans beyond the day's conference. Nearly two minutes into his remarks, Obama finally addressed the massacre at Fort Hood. It didn't take long before conservative commentators began expressing their disgust at Obama's allegedly out-of-whack priorities. He treated the event like a pep rally rather than a tragic occasion with a wider audience than those gathered in the room.[17] The bar for Rubio as a candidate is lower than Crist's. It's going to be a LONG none months between now and the primary for Charlie Crist. Others say David Paterson has been an awesome governor: Well, it doesn'''t look like very vulnerable Gov. David Paterson (D) is going to bow out of his race anytime soon. His campaign released two TV ads that will begin airing statewide today. The first takes aim at some of his critics. '''Some say I shouldn'''t be running for governor,''' Paterson says to the camera, singling out state legislators, union leaders, and corporations (but he leaves out the Obama White House, which doesn'''t want him running, either). The other ad is a biographical spot. New York???s CBS affiliate also notes that Paterson has hired Harold Ickes for his campaign. Things you might not have known about the VA contest: As it turns out, Creigh Deeds (D) lost the female vote to McDonnell (R), 46%-54%, despite making women'''s issues a central part of his campaign; in fact, he was the first statewide Democrat to lose the VA female vote since 2000''' Deeds also narrowly lost Fairfax County in Northern Virginia, 49%-51%; by comparison, Obama won it last year, 60%-39% and Tim Kaine won it in 2005, 60%-38%.[7]

I suppose when you're good at something you should keep at it. His townhall meetings look more like he's trying to get votes than solve real problems. He has also done more fundraisers (23) than President Bush (6) and President Clinton (5) did combined in their first years in office. President Obama picks Joe Biden as his VEEP choice.[18] When Republicans lost the same gubernatorial races four years ago, analysts correctly said it reflected the growing unpopularity of President Bush. We shall see if these losses foretell a Republican comeback. While President Obama remains popular - I like the guy - the fact is his domestic policies are out of touch with what most Americans want.[19] Obama is also encouraging Congress to pass new oversight regulations that would finally empower the SEC to monitor complex shadow banking industry transactions. It's a move that is long overdue and would help preserve fair and ethical capitalism. Personally, I hope President Obama does all of those things because as an American I''''''''''''''''''d like to feel proud of my president. I know I''''''''''''''''''ll never agree with everything he does, but I know I can support him as long as what he does sounds American. Personally, I look forward to that day, and I hope President Obama shifts closer to the center to become the bipartisan president he said he would be. In my heart, I know he can do it '''''''''''''''''' I just hope he does for America''''''''''''''''''s sake '''''''''''''''''' and selfishly, for my own.[15]

In fairness, my French counterparts underrated Mr Obama. In the year since his election, the President and the huge Democratic majority in Congress have done some substantial things. Obama did enact a huge fiscal stimulus at the beginning of his presidency. He continued the Bush policy of extending huge credits to troubled financial companies. He bailed out Chrysler and General Motors. (On Wall Street, the latter now carries the cruel nickname, "American Leyland".) The trouble is that most of Mr Obama's main accomplishments are things that he and his party never wanted to do. Worse (from the liberal point of view), they have consumed the political capital that he needed to accomplish the things he and his party did want to do.[14] Obama nixes the Bush dress code of always wearing a jacket in the Oval Office. This might seem trivial but that office has witnessed some of the greatest Americans making the most difficult and important decisions effecting the entire world. As Andy Card, former White House Chief of Staff put it, "The Oval Office symbolizes…the Constitution, the hopes and dreams, and I'm going to say democracy. When you have a dress code in the Supreme Court and a dress code on the floor of the Senate, floor of the House, I think it's appropriate to have an expectation that there will be a dress code that respects the office of the President." Some of his more classless staff even showed up in jeans at the beginning of his administration. Obama was so inspired he instituted "casual weekends."[18] By pouring borrowed trillions into the economy, we will never know the true "fix". The Democrats have held majorities in both the House and Senate for a few years now. Do they carry any responsibility for our financial crisis? I'm sorry, Bush is not in office and its time to stop the blame. Obama now owns this econmy the minute he borrowed the trillion from China.[20]

G.W. Bush and his Republican cronies left us with two wars, most of the world alienated with us, and our economy in the trash. Obama is winding down the Iraq war, doing his best to bring stability to Afghanistan, has skyrocketed the opinion of the U.S. in the world community, and his stimulus package has brought our economy out of a near-disastrous free fall. On top of all this, he is on the threshold of doing something that no president has been able to accomplish since the time of Woodrow Wilson in 1920: Universal health coverage.[21] The result was another major decline in the U.S. dollar. Almost at the end of Bush's second term the U.S. dollar fell to multi-decade lows but recovered slightly as the last days of his administration drew to a close. That brings us to the present day with President Obama. He inherited an economy which almost overnight went into free fall. While I don't agree personally with the measures taken to buttress the U.S. economy, it bears noting that the U.S. dollar is still above its recent George W. Bush low.[22] "As a property-rights person, I would view what's happening as massive land acquisitions and land-use control," said R.J. Smith, adjunct environmental scholar at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a Washington, D.C. -based group that advocates free enterprise and limited government and opposes most environmental regulation. "There's been a push to create these huge wild lands areas and connect them with corridors that are designed for wildlife rather than for people." That does not mean the Obama administration does not see dollar signs when it looks west. While the Bush administration went after the region's oil and gas reserves as a way to achieve greater energy independence, the Obama administration is shifting the focus to solar, wind and geothermal power as it looks for ways to boost both the economy and the state of the environment. Its greatest challenge may be whether it can develop those renewable resources without running into some of the same environmentalists who worried about the Bush administration allowing the destruction of environmentally sensitive land.[23]

The Obama administration has, yet again, asserted the broadest and most radical version of the "state secrets" privilege which previously caused so much controversy and turmoil among loyal Democrats (when used by Bush/Cheney) to attempt to block courts from ruling on the legality of the government's domestic surveillance activities. Obama did so again this past Friday just six weeks after the DOJ announced voluntary new internal guidelines which, it insisted, would prevent abuses of the state secrets privilege. Instead as predicted the DOJ continues to embrace the very same "state secrets" theories of the Bush administration which Democrats generally and Barack Obama specifically once vehemently condemned and is doing so in order literally to shield the President from judicial review or accountability when he is accused of breaking the law.[24] Why? As EFF explains. Can anyone deny that's true? If the President can simply use "secrecy" claims to block courts from ruling on whether he broke the law, then what checks or limits exist on the President's power to spy illegally on Americans or commit other crimes in a classified setting? By definition, there are none. That's what made this distortion of the "state secrets" privilege so dangerous when Bush used it, and it's what makes it so dangerous now. Quite unsurprisingly, the Bush administration loves this doctrine, as it is so consistent with its monarchical view of presidential infallibility, and the administration has become the most aggressive and enthusiastic user of this doctrine. As the Chicago Tribune detailed last year, the administration has also used this doctrine repeatedly to obstruct any judicial proceedings designed to investigate its torture and rendition policies, among others. This administration endlessly searches out obscure legal doctrines or new legal theories which have one purpose to eradicate limits on presidential power and to increase the President's ability to prevent disclosure of all but the most innocuous and meaningless information. That was the prevailing, consensus view at the time among Democrats, progressives and civil libertarians regarding Bush's use of the state secrets privilege: that the privilege was being used to exclude the President from the rule of law by seeking to preclude judicial examination of his conduct.[24]

Beyond that, just consider the broader implications of what is going on here. Even after they announced their new internal guidelines with great fanfare, the Obama administration is explicitly arguing that the President can break the law with impunity can commit crimes when it comes to domestic surveillance because our surveillance programs are so secret that national security will be harmed if courts are permitted to adjudicate their legality. As EFF put it last July (emphasis in original), government officials: seek to transform a limited, common law evidentiary into sweeping immunity for their own unlawful conduct. would sweep away these vital constitutional principles with the stroke of a declaration, arrogating to themselves the right to immunize any criminal or unconstitutional conduct in the name of national security. For that reason, as EFF pointedly noted the last time the Obama DOJ sought to compel dismissal based on this claim: "defendants' motion is even more frightening than the conduct alleged in the Amended Complaint." Think about that argument: the Obama DOJ's secrecy and immunity theories are even more threatening than the illegal domestic spying programs they seek to protect.[24] Bush increased spending on the National Institutes of Health by 36 percent and international aid by 74 percent, according to Heritage. He oversaw the largest, most porktacular farm bills ever. He signed the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, a massive new regulation of Wall Street. His administration defended affirmative action before the Supreme Court. He pushed amnesty for immigrants, imposed steel tariffs, supported Title IX and signed the McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform legislation. Oh, and he, not Obama, initiated the first bailouts and TARP. Not all of these positions were wrong or indefensible.[25] While we still have a long way to go, we have made meaningful progress toward achieving that goal." The actions taken by his administration such as implementing a 787-billion-dollar stimulus plan and introducing tax cuts "contributed to the first quarter of economic growth that we've had as a nation in over a year." The second obligation was "to tackle problems that had been festering, that had been kicked down the road year after year, decade after decade." Issues such as health care reform, education reform and the need to battle global warming are on the top of Obama's agenda.[10] Obama has done a very good job. His opposition is very vocal. He walks into the worst economic crisis since the 1930s and LESS then a year after taking office it is improving. He has dealt with the Big Three car makers going under, banks going under, and insurance companies going under (another series of inherited problem) and did well with that because they are on their way back. His only screw up may be health care. He should have left that one alone from a political stand point, but took the high road by trying to do what he said he would do. By going all in on that issue, politically it has allowed Republican leaches looking for an issue to attack him to have one that scares the crap out of middle America (as in middle class not Kansas).[4] Ok before the republican nut job get started, the Unemployment was expected to go higher, according to the economic experts. job losses have slowed. the jobs keep being eleminated and the president can't do any thing to stop it. back in 1983, ronald reagan did nothen to stop it, so why hold presdient Obama to a higher standard. after the 1990 recession, bill clinton passed a 23 billion dollar stumilis, that took 2 years to get job growth back. so chill out.[7] When Obama won the election I thought well he sounds ok, he seemed to be right down the middle on most subjects, was articulate and seemed sincere. Almost a year into his "gig" I am, like most, concerned about the direction he is going. An enormous stimulus bill, written by the likes of SEIU honchos, that was to have prevented unemployment from going above 8 percent, his ridicule of wallstreet while embracing the likes of Soros, his staff of admitted radicals that embrace the types of Governments we have fought so hard against. My conclusion is that the moderates, the centrist or anyone to the right do not have a snowballs chance in hell in getting their points accross to the President as the far, far left has his ear and is setting agendas that make most of us very,very uncomfortable.[9] I've often said that although I've voted primarily Democratic most of my adult life, I am not a hard core party person. Voting republican would not be so difficult if they had a reasonable candidate: 2000 and John McCain would have been the match I would've voted for but George W. Bush won the primaries and the rest is tragic history. Since that time and in most recent history, McCain not only sold his soul to win the 2008 Republican nomination but allowed the introduction to our culture of Sarah Palin, a vapid human being who has no real ideas about how to move America forward, a prescription for winning the hearts and mindless legions of rightwingers. That will be John McCain's legacy and too bad, he had so much potential. The Democrats won big the last two elections and need to show and use their power, just like the Republicans did from 2001-2006. They got their economic bills passed and we witnessed how that all turned out. They got both wars in gear and we revel in those two well designed conflicts. The Democrats need to copy the Republican playbook and unify in their effort to redesign America and live with it. Should their ideas fail, so be it. At least they tried.[26] Isn't it amazing that Democrats think that they and their media cronies are the only ones who have First Amendment rights? After attacking President George W. Bush and lying about him and the Republican Party for eight years, the Democrats are up in arms when someone tells the truth about this president and his socialistic programs. If a man is a liar, he is a liar. It needs to be said, and the country needs to know it. His high office is not any protection from the truth.[27] Voters for the first time are blaming President Obama nearly as much as President Bush for the country'''s continuing economic problems.[28]

Bloody, seemingly endless wars, recession comparable only to the Great Depression, hundreds of billions of dollars of debt and, most notably, an unprecedented onset of gloom have plagued our country following the Bush Administration. As a country, we elected President Barack Obama, placing our faith in him to repair a wounded nation. In a naive attempt to move forward, the leader of this downtrodden nation has thus far decided not to hold the former administration accountable for heinous acts of brutality. Those who have tortured and abused for years at Guantanamo Bay are not facing punishment.[29] "Election Day was a day of hope, it was a day of possibility, but it was also a sobering one because we knew even then that we faced an array of challenges that would test us as a country." Obama was swept to power on a promise of change just as the United States was confronting its worst economic crisis in decades, and with U.S. troops fighting two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. His administration, sworn in after his inauguration on January 20, had "two fundamental obligations," the U.S. president said.[10] Along with the fervor came a smothering flood of expectation that Obama would mediate all wars and conflicts, put a derailed world economy back on track, and make everyone happy by being the non-Bush. Mandela, who as South Africa's first post-apartheid president in 1994 had his own challenge of meeting soaring expectations, called for Obama 'to combat the scourge of poverty and disease everywhere." President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the first Iranian president since the 1979 Islamic revolution to congratulate a U.S. president on victory, seized on Obama's pledge to hold unconditional talks on his country's controversial nuclear program.[30] Good ol''' Clinton sold us out to the Mexicans with NAFTA and to the Chinese with '''Most favored Nation status'''. I guess those pesky human rights were just getting in the way of those big fat contributions from China. Bush had 2 wars to fight, Jim and Bill had none, they were too afraid to protect the U.S. and invoke controversy. They just let the UN tell us when to fight; it'''s safer politically that way. Bill could have saved Mogadishu but, not enough backbone and Kosovo, well the Muslims and their UN gave him all the support he needed for that little skirmish. When they passed the last stimulus package of over 700 Billion dollars. Obama owns this economy.[21] "Election Day was a day of hope, it was a day of possibility," Obama said at the start of an education speech in Madison, Wis. "But it was also a sobering one." His administration faced "an array of challenges" that included the financial crisis, record budget deficits, two wars and "frayed alliances around the world," Obama told the crowd at James C. Wright Middle School. Those challenges placed two obligations on his administration, Obama said, starting with rescuing the economy "from imminent collapse." He said the $787 billion stimulus bill and other actions are meeting this goal, though unemployment remains high.[31]

On other occasions, the president has been led off-topic to make news by a shouted question, so invariably reporters keep trying. It's still early days in the Obama administration, but he doesn't seem to mind it too much. Frustrated reporters also haven't had much of a crack at asking him anything lately -- Obama's last press conference was in July. In othe Oval today after meeting with President Ian Khama of Botswana, Obama was asked by Major Garrett of Fox News whether he was "yes or no" on the House bill.[6] The war with Fox News. In attempts to bring Chicago politics to the White House, Obama tries to shut out the most popular news channel in America because they dare to hold the President accountable and refuse blind allegiance like the lapdog network of MSNBC.[18] While the notion of someone becoming President through grassroots support is romantic, it doesn't happen. Obama's rise to the highest office began in Chicago, and it's no coincidence that his supporters here were brought along for the ride once he won. If he were to go against the machine even once, his largest source of support would be lost. Someone who won the popular vote by 6% can't afford to cast off his backers and prioritize the strength of his convictions. With the veto pen safely in the hands of a fellow Democrat, those who put Obama in the White House are free to bring the gravy train into the station.[1] WASHINGTON - In the never-ending struggle in the West over whether public lands should be harvested for their valuable metals, fuels and timber or set aside for future generations of people and wildlife, environmental interests have gained the upper hand since President Barack Obama moved into the White House.[23]

Like many people who desperately want to see the country take a more progressive course, I quibble and quarrel with some of President Obama's actions. I wish he'd been tougher on Wall Street, quicker to close Guantnamo, more willing to investigate Bush-era excesses, bolder in seeking truly universal health care. I wish he could summon more of the rhetorical magic that spoke so compellingly to the better angels of our nature. He's a president, not a Hollywood action hero.[32] The collapsing dollar, the deficit, a health care agenda from hell, cap and trade, horrible job numbers-they all belong to President Obama and no one else.[9]

Basically, after hope and change (which was very November 2008), there really isn't a big Obama name to run on. This doesn't mean there WILL NOT be a big Obama name to run on in 2010. It all depends on what he does. He won't be the do-nothing SNL president if he passes health care, let alone all that other stuff. If the economy improves a bit and he passes legislation, there will be an Obama wave. If it doesn't and he doesn't, there won't.[33] Well, fortunately Democratic strategists aren't taking marching orders from concern trolls like you. "Moderate" Democrats are most likely to be found in highly competitive districts home to plenty of Republicans who won't vote for them in any event, and which makes getting out your base very important. That, in turn, means giving your base something to get excited about, like national health care. As they assessed the results, Democratic lawmakers and party strategists said their judgment was that voters remained very uneasy about the economy and did not see Democrats producing on the health, energy and national security changes they promised when voters swept them to power only a year ago.'''[33] Very high budget deficits are likely to be predicted, along with stubbornly high unemployment and less-than-vigorous growth. Those numbers are likely to change the debate in Congress about what is achievable policy-wise, and it won't be to health care reform's advantage. "They won't repeat the mistake of 1994, not with their margins in both houses." Well, that depends on where they think the most political danger comes from. Does it come from not passing a health reform bill, or from passing one that they fear will be politically unpopular among centrists? In 1994, the Democrats went ahead with a budget reconciliation bill that raised taxes, trusting a popular President to help make the case to the voters.[33]

Your worldview has warped your understanding of simple facts: "Trickle down didn'''t really work but the deficit ballooned as tax cuts to the wealthy reduced government revenues." -Babak Actually the Reagan-Thatcher economic policies broke the back of inflation and socialism, and produced a dramatic bull market with historical levels of wealth creation for everyone for a generation. His "tax-cuts for the wealthy" were actually across-the-board cuts in tax rates which resulted in more -- not less-- more government revenue, as well as more job creation and economic growth. The problem was that Congress kept spending money even faster which produced the deficits; at least one or both houses of Congress were controlled by the Democrat party for Reagan's entire two terms as President. "The U.S. dollar regained 50% of its value during Clinton'''s presidency. You could argue that it was due to the balanced budgets and the elimination of the federal deficit. Or that it was due to the increase in the tax burden on the wealthy[22] Congress and the Obama administration have spent the past 10 months ramming one policy of massive government expansion, power and spending through the system after another. It's been a feeding frenzy of rewarding key constituents with not only billions of tax dollars but real lasting power over the economy and our lives. It's the power grab and the thuggish tactics. That's part of the reason the economy is not producing jobs.[9]

Where are the jobs you promised? Remember your administration promised that if the Porkulus was passed the unemployment rate would not be above 8%. Do you remember? - Bennie Roberts, Pittsburgh PA ===================================================== Dearest Bennie: In a report issued by his economic advisors on January 10, 2009 (BEFORE Barack Obama was even sworn in as President), economic advisors Christina Romer and Jared Bernstein issued a report titled "The Job Impact of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan". The VERY FIRST WORDS in the report are these: "A key goal enunciated by the President-Elect concerning the American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan is that it should save or create at least 3 million jobs by the end of 2010. For this reason, we have undertaken a preliminary analysis of the jobs effects of some of the prototypical recovery packages being discussed. Our analysis will surely evolve as we and other economists work further on this topic.[7] MADISON, Wisconsin — A year after his historic election President Barack Obama told Americans Wednesday he had saved the nation from economic ruin and launched sorely needed and far-reaching reforms.[10] For two very different ideological views on Obama's first year anniversary, George speaks with Arnie Arnesen, a pro-Democrat radio host from New Hampshire, and Peter Schiff, known as "Dr Doom" in the world of finance, a Republican and trenchant critic of Barack Obama's economic reforms. Find out more this Sunday 8:30pm on SBS ONE. [34]

Arianna Huffington wrote an article this week titled The Audacity of Winning Vs the Timidity of Governing (here's the link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/obama-one-year-later-the_b_343209.html). It was inspired by David Plouffe's new book about the Obama campaign, and she asked a key question: what would Candidate Obama think of President Obama? It cuts to the heart of an issue I've been debating with myself all year: Was Obama a wolf in sheep's clothing, or upon arriving in Washington was he swallowed up by a system so entrenched that no one can change it? First, for argument's sake we're going to assume that everything Obama campaigned on has majority public approval. This isn't about asking why he hasn't achieved his stated agenda yet.[1] Why focus on just the economy? Yes it is bad and will take a while to turn around. (IMHO the real blow to the recovery will happen next year when Obama allows the Bush tax cuts to expire.) RobM mentions a dozen or so other campaign pledges that President Obama has not lived up to that in their totality explain the loss of faith in "Hope and Change."[33]

After Tuesday's stinging elections in New Jersey and Virginia, Obama traveled Wisconsin to give a speech to a fawning liberal audience. He proceeded to once again blame President Bush because he inherited the worst economy since the Great Depression.[35] From which I mote that progressives took the worst body blow--though if conservatives continue perkily believing that intraparty warfare is the surest route to success. well, welcome to Barack Obama's second term. The more I mull the "this wasn't a referendum on Obama" message, the more I wonder why Democrats are celebrating this. It's kind of a problem that this election wasn't a referendum on Obama, or more importantly, on Bush. Obama's coattails are supposed to give them the spine they need to enact sweeping change. The bad news of last night wasn't that they lost the New Jersey governorship. It's that the era of running against George Bush, or for Barack Obama, is over. They just lost the two best campaign planks they've had in decades.[33] We the People expect to be heard and not ridiculed when we speak to our government. When the American people voted for Barack Obama they were voting for change yes, but they were voting for change that they wanted. They were not voting for the radical change that Obama, Pelosi, and Reid seem to want. The American people do not want a changed America; they want their old America back. The American people voted the Democrats into power because the Democrats promised that they would listen.[36] Because almost a year into it Mr. President; You own it. At the very worst the American people are realizing that Obama is not giving them the government they thought they were getting. Perhaps they are realizing that instead of "change" what they are really getting are "chains".[36]

The war against terrorists is over along with the nation's hegemonic role. A man with roots would know that wild policy swings of the kind that we've experienced with healthcare, cap and trade and education proposals cannot possibly fly, with the American people, even with those who voted for President Obama in the last election.[5] Ever since then, the left has excoriated President Bush for continuing to read "My Pet Goat." Barack Obama, careful to never have such a moment, has just failed miserably. You can hear the audio, with Fred Thompson's commentary over it, here. It is profoundly disturbing and disrespectful to the families of the victims and the soldiers at Ft. Hood, Tx. Instead of acting to not alarm unsuspecting kids, Obama couldn't be bothered to interrupt his cool-guy image and interest-group pandering. President Obama had his press conference about the Ft. Hood incident in conjunction to an address of American Indians. It would have been one thing to give a brief thank you and get to the pressing matter of the day.[37] According to Wikipedia, Mr. Medicine Crow is a recipient of the Presidential Medal of Freedom (the U.S.'s highest civilian honor), given by President Barack Obama on August 12, 2009. President Obama got his goofy shout out wrong, too. Yes, had it been George Bush giving shout outs in the immediate aftermath of the worst base tragedy I can recall, he would have been savaged by the media (and rightly so). Whatever one chooses to say about President Bush, it is clear that he admired, respected, and appreciated the military and those who chose to defend the nation by serving in it.[38]

"The image of the United States has improved markedly in most parts of the world, reflecting global confidence in Barack Obama. In many countries opinions of the United States are now about as positive as they were at the beginning of the decade before George W. Bush took office. Improvements in the U.S. image have been most pronounced in Western Europe, where favorable ratings for both the nation and the American people have soared.[21] P resident Barack Obama instructed Justice Department attorneys to argue last week in San Francisco before Federal District Judge Vaughn Walker, that he must toss out the Electronic Frontier Foundation's Shubert v. Bush lawsuit challenging the secret state's driftnet surveillance of Americans' electronic communications. This latest move by the administration follows a pattern replicated countless times by Obama since assuming the presidency in January: denounce the lawless behavior of his Oval Office predecessor while continuing, even expanding, the reach of unaccountable security agencies that subvert constitutional guarantees barring "unreasonable searches and seizures."[13] Why? Because it asserted in a Motion to Dismiss it filed on Friday to allow the lawsuit to proceed under any circumstances no matter the safeguards imposed or specific documents excluded "would require the disclosure of highly classified NSA sources and methods about the TSP and other NSA activities" (page 8). According to the Obama administration, what were once leading examples of Bush's lawlessness and contempt for the Constitution namely, his illegal, warrantless domestic spying programs are now vital "state secrets" in America's War on Terror, such that courts are prohibited even from considering whether the Government was engaging in crimes when spying on Americans. That was the principal authoritarian instrument used by Bush/Cheney to shield itself from judicial accountability, and it is now the instrument used by the Obama DOJ to do the same.[24] Are you an American who read the Constitution? WTF is wrong with you if you don't understand the state of the government that Bush left behind? The Bush Administration acted as a government within a government, starting illegal wars, trashing the Constitution, torturing, spying on Americans, all while claiming to be a "war president".[16]

Republicans expressed more confidence in Bernanke to recommend the right thing for the economy from 2006 to 2008 while Bush was in office, but after the change in administrations, that pattern reversed and now Democrats are much more confident in Bernanke. Whether this indicates that Americans are unaware of the political background of these officials, or merely put greater emphasis on their current service to one party or the other is unclear. Since Gallup does not have a Bush-era rating on Gates, it is not possible to document whether a similar shift occurred in his ratings, though, as noted, such a shift would not be unprecedented. [12] I have a bet with a growing number of readers that President Mahmoud Abbas will not offer any concessions whatsoever in what relates to the core rights, which is something that the near future will bring to light. The door is open to all readers to join this bet, with or against me, and he who shall live long shall see. Abu Mazen today is in a much worse situation than when he was Prime Minister in 2003. He will not resign because, in my opinion, he will never accept that Hamas'''s leadership will score a personal victory against him, since their dispute has now become as personal as it is political. He might find an exit by telling the Americans that he will not run for president again, when the time for the presidential and legislative elections comes next January, and that they need to find someone else who can bear the consequences of their weak policies in the region. (He will agree to postpone the elections should Hamas sign the reconciliation; however, the latter rejects this for fear of losing in the elections). Another option for Abu Mazen is to stand up to the Americans and declare a popular policy, i.e. an extremist policy, which will cause the Palestinians to lose the limited American support they have, leaving them with nobody, as Hamas will never find a foreign party that would deal with the organization. The latter is classified as a terrorist group in the United States and the European Union, while the Jewish lobby is powerful enough to prevent any changes in the stance towards Hamas.[39]

What he can offer his liberal supporters amounts to this: some modest symbolic executive actions (the U.S. will again fund international aid organisations that support family planning) and a handful of small to mid-sized legislative changes: the time in which workers may bring pay discrimination suits has been extended; up to four million more will be enrolled in government health programmes for under-18s; and credit card companies will face new restrictions on lending practices. Liberals have reacted to this with very restrained enthusiasm. Turnout among blacks and young people collapsed in elections this week. The President's defenders offer three excuses for this thin record. He has had to contend with a uniquely uncooperative Republican opposition. He still has plenty of time left to accomplish great things, and third, the savage recession has cramped his freedom of action.[14]

The airwaves and op-ed pages brim with more-in-sorrow-than-in-anger lamentations on the GOP's failure to get with President Obama's program, the party's inevitable demographic demise and its thralldom to the demonic deities of the right -- Limbaugh, Beck, Palin. Such sages as the New York Times ' Sam Tanenhaus and Frank Rich insist that the right is out of ideas.[25] I believe Republican Cox also was in the mix. Dodd actually got a "special mortgage" from Countrywide right before they went under. Bush isn't in office, he is not our President. Obama is running our country and this blame game is getting old. I can't recall any past President whinning so much about the mess he "inherited". The quote: "Those who do not know history are doomed to relive it" seems strangely appropriate here. The Republicans either hope the public as a whole is completely stupid, or they themselves have no memory of their own actions[20] Although the Republicans have secured a number of key states, a clash of interests between the moderates and the hardliners within the party persists. There is no reason for the Republicans to forget just yet that their last president was voted out of power as one of the most unpopular leaders of the nation. Or put behind the fact that most of the crosses that Mr Obama is now burdened with were the fruits of Mr Bush's eight-year misrule. Equally, Mr Obama should also snap out of the fairy tale that has been spun around him by the liberal press.[11]

Give the guy a break. He inherited Bush's mess and has been assigned by us to clean it up. Unemployment was well on the rise last year on Bush's watch due to his shortcomings. Obama wasn't going to be able to stop it immediately, and at least he's stabilized it. The unemployment rate went up a total of 0.3 percent in the last four months and the economic recession is expected to end later this year. It's also not Obama's fault that Chicago failed in its bid for the 2016 Olympics. He helped make the pitch for America. He's our president and it's his hometown.[40] Just two years, one month, and four days later Barack Obama decides it is time to run for President of the United States of America. The rest as they say is history.[41] Be sure to read Caleb Howe's rundown on the last year from a conservative point of view. It's been more than a year since America stepped into history by electing its first black president, Barack Obama.[42]

One only wishes that Coulter was relegated to a niche as tiny as your own. The first amendment is a wonderful thing and exists to primarily protect UNPOPULAR speech, as popular speech is seldom in need of such, so the likes of feisty and coulter do serve a purpose in the grand scheme of things. When you read through feisty'''s many, many, many, many daily entries to this blog, or if you accidentally start reading Coulter or see her on '''Real Time''', don'''t throw up your hands in disgust (and what were you doing eating your hands anyway?) Say '''God Bless America!''' and be thankful Coulter doesn'''t blog here too, or no one else would ever get in a word. Will Obama "Re-Double" his efforts to create more jobs? You know, like he did last month. Conner Q., Kansas Obie is on course to re-double the national debt in his 4 years in office.[7] It is a little of a lot of things, but the debt and economy top the list. People are finally seeing Obama's communist czars and the people he has chosen to surround himself with and they are forming a puzzle with the rest of the pieces. Words from his own books, the black separatist church the Obama's attended for 20 years, words from his own mouth about how he wants to spread the wealth and the people that surround him believe in reparations. People feel good about giving to charity, but they need to take care of their own families first and they do not like the idea of being forced to give to others via higher taxes.[9]

We need a laser focus on getting America up and running again. If Obama could/can pull that off before the next election, he would waltz in and then deal with all the other stuff. I just don't see how he could make the election promises he made when he knew that he was going to have to clean up after Bush, deal with two wars, and restart the economy. It was the one thing that made me not want to vote for him.[1] Fourth: the last minute bailouts. Whether he was trying not to leave the country completely crippled before handing it over to Obama, or in reaction to the Fiscal crisis, Bush passed the first nearly $1 trillion bailout for Wall Street (including AIG). In an attempt to stem the massive layoffs in industry Obama followed- Yes those figures are shocking- but I cannot image how much worse things would have been if the economy would have been allowed to completely tank. Other nations did their own bailouts, many as aggressive or even more than our own. The difference is, that they didn't have the huge war and tax debt Bush had built.[20]

You're right, we will get out of Iraq, we were getting out of Iraq when Bush set the time table in 2008, which Obama hasn't altered. Afghanistan was going to be his focus on the campaign trail, but he's too busy checking out his "focus groups" to make an important DECISION (you know. what executives do?) while Americans lives are more at risk every single day. WHERE ARE THE DEMOCRATS, and WAR PROTESTERS NOW? Take a wild guess as to which group will take the biggest hit on cap and trade? The evil rich dude with 7 SUV's? Or the single mother that commutes 40 minutes to work every day, just to pay MORE for electricity for her kids.[1] You are right to say that Obama inherited a mess. Both parties have been profligate: Republicans took us into a war we cannot afford, and Democrats want to expand our health care obligations when we cannot afford our current social entitlements (Medicare and Social Security will begin to bankrupt the country when they become cash expenses in three years).[22] All of the rights you say "you" lost because of GW.are all still very much afforded to CITIZENS of this country. Now, illegal immigrants. well they don't and should not have any rights here. They are FELONS who are exploiting the naivety of liberals like yourself. Through Obama. we all will have the right to give our hard earned money and then pay for health care for those who CHOOSE not to work. not to become legal citizens. not to be a productive citizen.[21] "But through Obama. we all will have the right to give our hard earned money and then pay for health care for those who CHOOSE not to work. not to become legal citizens. not to be a productive citizen." You're leaving out hard working folks who have been laid off from their job then re-hired as contractors so corporations can avoid the burden of costly medical benefits.[21]

The Bush administration wanted to privitize Social Security, Voted out in 2008. Now Obama wants to put this so called health care bill on the back of the elderly, will be voted out.[9] It is deeply disappointing. I was told that Obama was going to get us out of other people's countries, and not only is that not the case, but Obama sent 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan, and he is escalating the carnage there. The health care bill has already sent up everyone's premiums, and even if the bill doesn't pass, those premiums won't go down again.[3] Of course the big party is the huge push by Obama and Pelosi to pass the job-killing Health Care Reform bill.[7] I always got that Obama had four major agenda items: Health Care Reform, Environmental reform (highlighted by cap and trade), Education Reform, and getting us out of Iraq/Focused on Afghanistan. Outside of fighting the immediate fires (such as economic issues), he hasn't strayed far from those big four things. Sure, he has tried to do more in less time than many, I don't think he's tried to do it all.[1] "I always got that Obama had four major agenda items: Health Care Reform, Environmental reform (highlighted by cap and trade), Education Reform, and getting us out of Iraq/Focused on Afghanistan." What did he propose on education? Every politician uses some variation of the phrase "strengthen education", but I don't recall any major specifics.[1]

Then there's health care reform. I've been impatient with Obama's strategy of letting Congress take the lead on writing legislation, but he's brought us to the brink of truly meaningful reform much faster than anyone could have imagined a year ago.[32] The tail is wagging the dog. Be it against Rahm Emanuel or the Geithner's and Bernanke's of the inner circle, I expected the President to stand tall and fight for his ideals, even if they came at a price. He is beholden to special interests. He cut a deal with Big Pharma, and hasn't spent any political capital on issues he promised to fight for. There's too much money at stake for his handlers to let him go off trying to make the world a better place. That's the real reason he has been nearly silent during the sparring over health care reform, save for one lofty speech. Those who really call the shots need their meal ticket to get four more years in office.[1] People are in favor of health care reform with a public option. They are in favor of an energy bill that weens us off fossil fuels and protects the environment. They need to get the job done and ignore the immature Republicans that can only say no. Republicans who refuse to do their job and don't even try to solve the huge problems that we have should be deeply ashamed of themselves.[36] White House Claims 'Stimulus' Saved/Created 650,000 Jobs (but it imported 1,125,000 foreign workers at same time). They keep shedding jobs. wait until we smother businesses with health care "reform" and cap and trade.[7] White House officials and Senate Democrats met in private three times last week to craft health care legislation.[43] Monumental fail. Thats why the white house is talking about another round of stimulus, becuase this one FAILED. As for health care, love to see you justify this:H.R. 3962 provides that an individual (or a husband and wife in the case of a joint return) who does not, at any time during the taxable year, maintain acceptable health insurance coverage for himself or herself and each of his or her qualifying children is subject to an additional tax.[1]

In 1989, the Republicans continued control of the White House with George H. W. Bush's presidency. While his administration managed to avoid a similar feat, the U.S. dollar fell to new lows during the first half of his term. The U.S. dollar regained 50% of its value during Clinton's presidency. [22] One thing the new administration clearly did not anticipate was that Republicans in Congress would be so consistently and unanimously obstructionist or that Democrats would have to be introduced to the alien concept of party discipline. It took the White House too long to realize that bipartisanship is a tango and that there's no point in dancing alone.[32]

To the editor: In response to the letter, "Who will pull the wagon if all want to ride?" (Oct. 23), I can only say, "Where have you been for the past eight years?" Under the former administration and Republican Congress, the government grew bigger and faster than ever before in our history, taking us from a surplus that was created during the Clinton years to the edge of bankruptcy and the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. Certainly you are not suggesting that we continue to follow those who brought us to the edge of this abyss? That would be suicide, not to mention just stupid. As for the loss of personal freedoms, either you are ignoring how the former administration trampled the Bill of Rights and abused personal civil rights with illegal wiretapping, unlawful arrests and confinement, not to mention the use of torture, or you are just ignorant of these acts? Either way, I suggest you go back and reread our history for the past eight years. You might gain a more balanced perspective of what really happened and better understand how and why the current president is doing what he is doing, trying to save our country from ruin.[20] Not an American president. His party almost always loses seats in Congress in the elections two years into his term. His authority over his party dwindles. There are exceptions to the rule -- Franklin Roosevelt enacted the Social Security Act in Year 3 of his first term; Ronald Reagan passed an important tax reform in Year 2 of his second term -- but not many. Presidents who miss their moment, as Bill Clinton did in 1993, risk losing their impetus altogether: Mr Clinton did ultimately sign important laws, but the larger part of them were forced upon him by his opponents.[14] I'm sure you're right about the more liberal members. Didn't the elections a couple days ago tell us something about independents? Don't moderate Dem reps need to retain these independents who helped put them in Congress last year to win re-election next year? I stand by the comment that it would be better for these reps if a bill like the current House or Senate bills did not pass, especially if they're never forced to vote on it.[33] I think the approval ratings of Corzine need to be remembered. He was at 38% when Obama was inaugurated, and 39% on election day this year. That is hard hole to climb out of. Hell, I am from Illinois and Blago, had better numbers then that for his re-election (granted the country was not in the midst of a epic recession) and managed somehow to win.[33]

Jeff Evanston IL: so chill out. The real problem in the country are the businesses, both big and small, that are supposed to create the jobs. Instead of creating jobs, they are destoying jobs. To stop this trend, Obama and the Liberals in Congress need increase regulation on those businesses, make them comply with Green Energy laws, and need to increase the taxes on those businesses. Obama should keep doing that until these businesses start hiring people again. TIED TO OBIE Is it really a great idea to tie yourself to Obama theses days? It didn't work in the election Tuesday. Obie's done nothing, nada, but kick this country in the butt and he's damn proud of the damage it's caused.[7] It'''s that simple. Obama is lying about why he'''s delaying (70 days now) his decision. Yes, blood has shed on his lie. Is Ft Worth a pre-cursor to Obama'''s poor job of leadership as the Commander of Forces and lying to the people? Why didn'''t he act as COC on all the information about this man that was available? Okay, so you feel comparing Obama to Bush makes a point.[7] The bail outs happened on Bush's watch and was approved by McCain, so why is it Obama's problem? Because, the GOP has done a great job of pinning all of Bush's mistakes on Obama. These tea baggers are just an extension of the conservative wing, but following in the footsteps of their new hero, Glenn Becck, they do a lot of crying for ratings.[1] Bush's "compassionate conservatism" was promoted as an alternative to traditional conservatism. Bush promised to be a "different kind of Republican," and he kept that promise. He advocated government activism, and he put our money where his mouth was. He federalized education with No Child Left Behind -- co-sponsored by Teddy Kennedy -- and oversaw the biggest increase in education spending in history (58 percent faster than inflation), according to the Heritage Foundation, while doing next to nothing to advance the conservative idea known as school choice. With the prescription drug benefit, he created the biggest new entitlement since the Great Society (Obama is poised to topple that record).[25] All Obama had to do was to declare victory and bring our boys home, thanking Bush for winning the war. It would have shut up the Republicans. This sensible course would have impaired the profits and share prices of those firms that comprise the military/security complex. Instead of doing what Obama said he would do and what the voters elected him to do, Obama restarted the war in Afghanistan and launched a new one in Pakistan.[44]

What I find most interesting is Congressional District 23 in New York. Where a Democrat was elected to represent this district. the first time since the Civil War. To see this very conservative district reject the ultra right wing outsiders, such as a Sarah Palin, Glen Beck, Rush Limbaugh and others must be shaking the Republican Party to its very foundation. The Republican Party even threw their own candidate "under the bus" to appease the Neo Conservative gauntlet and now must suffer the consequences. The Republican Party must find its identity.[19]

Fundamentally changing America means replacing it with something new and if that''''''''''''''''''s the case, then it would cease to be America '''''''''''''''''' and I can''''''''''''''''''t support anyone who believes in that. What about all those people who hated George W. Bush? What was their excuse? Well, if you listen to what they have to say, they actually believe Bush endangered the Constitution with the Patriot Act and violated international law by indefinitely detaining enemy combatants and sending troops to Iraq. Legally, I could argue every single one of those points. As a lawyer, I don''''''''''''''''''t think Bush ever violated the Constitution and I am certain he never violated international law. At the very least, those people who disliked President Bush felt that his decisions were immoral and if that''''''''''''''''''s the case, then they had a right to feel that way and that can only mean one thing.[15] Rollins agrees, but believes the gun may be aimed a little lower than Dean thinks. He sees an unhappy electorate that keeps voting for change but never gets it. '''They thought Bush was the source of all their problems,''' he said. '''I think a lot of people like Obama, they like that he'''s charismatic, they like his family. They'''re beginning to wonder if he'''s a leader.'''[45] President Obama avoided the district like the plague, which may have helped. People may have resented all the outside influence on their race. Sarah Palin was able to push liberal Republican Dede Scozzafava aside in this race, but Palin's candidate still lost.[19] Were Tuesday'''s off-off-year elections a referendum on President Obama and the Democrats, or just a low-turnout event in which a few Republicans got lucky? We turn to Howard Dean and Ed Rollins for answers.[45]

President Obama is degrading the Oval Office. In recent months, his administration has engaged in puerile, partisan attacks on his predecessor, former President George W. Bush.[5] Just a month ago, 55% pointed the finger at Bush, while only 37% said the policies Obama has put in place since taking office were at fault. These findings had remained largely unchanged since May. Sixty-two percent (62%) now trust their own judgment more than the president'''s when it comes to the economic issues facing the nation, up three points from a month ago and up 13 points from early February.[28]

I think Obama's big problem/mistake was not paring down what he wanted to accomplish while he was running for office. It became apparent that the economy was in REAL trouble, not just having a significant bump. I remember during an interview or possibly a debate he was asked if that was going to limit the things he was going to do as president.[1] I truly believe that Barack Obama will go down in history as one of the worst presidents in the last 100 years. For those who insist that it is too soon to make such a prediction, I give you Exhibit A: the economy. With unemployment at 10 percent, an artificial gross domestic product and deficits that my grandchildren will not pay off, I find it increasingly difficult to see how this president can come away with a positive image.[21] Unemployment was 10% in the middle of the Gipper's first term. This doesn't mean Obama will be a good President or that the economy will rebound. It does mean its a bit too early to tell.[21]

Now you've done it, Bennie in Pittsburgh. Nashville will now spend the whole day telling you 'but he never said that!' Did Not Did Not Did Not! =============================================== lol You are SO RIGHT! :) I already submitted two posts about it that haven't appeared (so far), so thanks for helping me get the word out that President Obama NEVER SAID the stimulus would keep unemployment under 8%. Will Obama "Re-Double" his efforts to create more jobs? You know, like he did last month.[7] Anytime I hear something in this ultra-conservative city about America's problems, everyone wants to point fingers at President Obama -- from the high unemployment rate to Chicago's failure to land the 2016 Olympics. They point fingers at Obama for no other reason than he's a Democrat.[40] Ever since President Obama was elected a year ago I feel haunted by a dark, addictive force that constantly tempts me into obsessing over all the reasons why President Obama is bad for America.[15] The examples of pay for play are too numerous to mention. What currently happens in Chicago is we have a system where everyone around the mayor who hasn't been convicted yet has their hands in things that range from ethically dubious to outright illegal. All the while, the mayor himself looks doe-eyed at the local press and says if there's corruption, he certainly isn't aware of it. As sure as the sky is blue, Richard M. Daley will never even be charged with a crime because he's smart enough to let his henchmen handle everything. There will never be a recording to link him to wrongdoing, because he's not even in the room when deals are cut. They get a wink and a nod and know what to do. This is the model President Obama witnessed for years, and never did he utter a word about it or aspire to change it. The only difference between how things are done in Chicago and in Washington is that in Chicago deals are for city contracts to benefit those who prop up complicit leaders, while in Washington lobbyists openly engage in bribery and nobody even worries about secrecy.[1]

The democrats have controlled congress for the past three years, the last one with Obama as President.[20] Republicans need to go back and rein in the spending. Republicans balanced the budget under President Clinton but lost their way under President Bush. That cost them in 2006. This year's spending should, in a logical world, cost Democrats in 2010.[19] There are social issues, but keep in mind that Bush was chosen as the GOP's dream candidate in part because is soft on abortion. Middle-class women are the key swing voters in this election, an there are a lot of pro-choice soccer moms who lean Republican. The most active segment of the GOP base is pro-life, but the majority of people in this country are not and the Republican thinkers and money men know it. Bush is not a'stealth' candidate; he comes from Eastern moneyed Republicans; his dad despised the Christian GOP activists (and the feeling was mutual). Gore knows this, which is why he feels the need to protest (too much) that Bush really is pro-life it's been the Democrat's hole-card for so long he can't bear to feel the tactical advantage slowly slipping away from him.[46]

The law cannot be a tool of vengence, never a hostage, nor a fortification against the martyrs it has created. What did we really see on November 2, 2009? Was it really a reprimand of Barack Obama? Has the country recognized the error of it's ways and returned to it's conservative roots? The answer is yes, and the answer is no. The American people on 11/2 showed at the very least they are not head-over-heals in love with Obama anymore. They are no longer buying his excuse that the problems we face today are problems that he inherited from Republicans.[36] We interrupt this broadcast to bring you the President's thoughts on the attack at Fort Hood. Except, Barack Obama did not seem to realise the news networks were relaying his remarks live to the nation. Before moving on to the shooting, he offered his thanks to the people organising the event and offered a "shout out" to someone in the audience.[47] When you look at the facts of Barack Obama's history there isn't much outside of academic achievement. He didn't accomplish much in the senate as he resigned early after becoming President and spent the vast majority of his time (over 90%) away from the Senate during the long campaign. The question remains- why do we think He is so smart? More and more I look at his actions as president and during the campaign and must conclude He is not smart, but dumb, angry, and egotistical.[41] After graduating college Obama became a community organizer for a time before being accepted to Harvard. Obviously graduating from Harvard and becoming president of the Harvard Law Review are two great accomplishments indicating Obama is intelligent, but it doesn't necessarily mean He has to be a genius. Note that around this time Obama decides it is time to wrote an autobiography but of course He has no ego. Four years later Obama runs for Illinois Senate and wins by knocking his opponent Alice Palmer out of the race through a petition challenge. This was Chicago hardball politics at its finest- take out your opponent before you have to beat them in a real campaign.[41]

Obama's overall job approval rating in the Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll fell below 50% for the first time in July. A month-by-month review of the president'''s ratings shows that they held steady in August and September before declining slightly last month.[28] With Bush, the 9/11 attacks were an ongoing threat, and required immediate action from the president to coordinate a military response. Every second he continued to read to children was a second without a commander-in-chief. The response to the Fort Hood attacker was carried out by base security and local law enforcement, and by the time Obama made his remarks, the gunman had been neutralized. His choice wasn't between action and delay, but between offering condolences at 5:01 p.m. or 5:03 p.m. - making his offense not much more than a failure of decorum.[17] The presidents looks are flashing back" "Shut up! Shut up." It looks that the president would carry his promises in his pocket as his predecessor did. George Bush must feel obliged to President Obama for keeping his tradition intact. Probably, a politician believes that fulfilling his promises is insulting both himself and his promises.[48] President Obama campaigned hard all weekend for Democratic Gov. Jon Corzine in New Jersey and Creigh Deeds in the Virginia governor's race. On Election Night he watched the Chicago Bulls game on television.[19] Obama, as Commander-in-Chief deemed Afghanistan "a war of necessity". It was President Obama's decision to send 15,000 troops there. He owns this war and needs to stop delaying making the much awaited key decisions while our troops are in harms way[20] When asked if the United States is exceptional, President Obama said America is exceptional and England is exceptional and Greece is exceptional. That the United States is sui generis didn't cross his mind. How could it? He is pledged to a scenario in which America opts out of its traditional role as peace keeper, the balance wheel in maintaining international equilibrium.[5] Conservatives have had to not only put up with a lot of moderation and ideological flexibility, we've had to endure nearly a decade of taunting from gargoyles insisting that the GOP is run by crazed radicals. With Obama racing to transform America into a European welfare state fueled by terrifying deficit spending, this seems like a good moment to argue for limited government. Oh, and a little forgiveness, please, for not trusting the judgment of the experts who insist they know what's happening on the racist, paranoid, market-fundamentalist, Stalinist right.[25] Obama started out in the Chicago political machine, becoming a state Senator. It is impossible to win elected office as an Illinois Democrat without the support of this machine. This is a key point, because any notion of Obama's Presidential win being akin to Mr. Smith Goes to Washington is false. He had a full taste of the most corrupt political system in the country right from the start. You shake hands with shady characters (google Tony Rezco), you smile and nod a lot so those with influence know you're one of them, and most of all your victory represents a guarantee of return on their investment.[1] Housing has not yet stabilized. It is showing the beginning signs of stabilization. Car sales are not at the level they were during the cash for clunkers program. ME:}: During Bush's terms in office, democrats were constantly attacking Bush and saying that their dissent was patriotic. Don't complain when people complain about obama and call him names.[21] There''''''''''''''''''s nothing wrong with disliking or even hating a president you don''''''''''''''''''t believe in as long as it isn''''''''''''''''''t blind hatred. That anger however, should be supported by valid reasons and should be tempered so that one is able to support their president in case he does reach his hand across the aisle. George W. Bush made bipartisan efforts during his second term in office as evidenced by his work with the Democrats on the Kennedy/McCain immigration bill and the bailout. He also helped the people of Africa and victims of AIDS more than any other president in history. That should have earned him some points with the left, but it didn''''''''''''''''''t.[15] The sweeping bill designated more than 2 million acres as wilderness area - nearly as much protected land as President George W. Bush created in two terms in office.[23]

There is no way that the guy after Bush who successfully revived the economy and dealt efficiently with the wars is not getting re-elected. Right now, he's the guy who hasn't done very much, and it's because he's spreading himself too thin at a critical moment. I agree with Jason that he hasn't been forceful enough (at least not publicly). It was one of Bush's great faults that he didn't really understand the role of the president. That role is to convince the American public that their ideas are right. The public pressures Congress and Congress enacts based on those desires. Bush came out and stated things and then looked confused with his executive order didn't come into being. [1] The republican strategy is simple. Take advantage short attencion span of american people. convince them with empty slogans that they have abetter plan. Make them forget that thay had control either the house or the presidentcy for at least 12yrs. This got us two wars costing trillions and a trashed economy. thay do not care if you do not vote republican, thay want you to drop out period. This strategy has worked in thepast and it will in the future.[3] The U.S. government is now so totally under the thumbs of organized interest groups that "our" government can no longer respond to the concerns of the American people who elect the president and the members of the House and Senate. Voters will vent their frustrations over their impotence on the president, which implies a future of one-term presidents.[44]

The administration bailed out the auto industry and we actually heard the president of the United States reassure Americans that General Motors warranties would be honored. These and other actions convinced the financial markets that the White House would do anything to avoid a complete meltdown.[32] "We cannot expect the Americans to jump from capitalism to communism, but we can assist their elected leaders in giving Americans small doses of socialism, until they suddenly awake to find they have communism." Nikita Kruschev - Three months before his first visit to the United States in 1962. I truly hope and pray that I am wrong, but I am dreadfully fearful that we have in the White House an ego-driven man whose primary goal is indeed to, as he used the term in his own words on more than one occasion during his campaign, TRANSFORM this country from what we've known it to be to now, to one consistent with far differing ideology from that of the framers of our constitution.[21]

Tommy Christopher is Asylum's White House Correspondent. Today he looks back on the first year of Obama's term from a progressive perspective.[42] We have a sinister old SOB leading the senate.Still though, Obama is as radical and left as we've ever had in the white house. He is inexperienced and is floundering around on everything. The thing that people need to realize is that Obama, Pelosi and Reid claimed they would "reach across the aisle".[4] Regardless of what people say, in time, most will realize that universal healthcare will be a necessity. It works in other countries, America just has to get it's economic house in order and we can afford what we really need and healthcare for all, affordable healthcare, is vital! The latest polls show most Americans agree on the public option, so go for it and explain why it can happen.[26] " -Babak This is what I will argue: Again, look who controlled Congress. Gingrich swept into power in 1994 with his Contract For America, which allowed Republicans to control both houses of Congress for the first time in 40 years.[22] For the first time in recent years, voters trust Republicans more than Democrats on all 10 key electoral issues, including the economy, regularly tracked by Rasmussen Reports.[28] By contrast, years of high unemployment tend to be conservative years: Gerald Ford launched the deregulation of the U.S. economy in 1974-75; Jimmy Carter executed a right turn in 1979-80; Ronald Reagan broke unions and cut taxes in 1981-82. Many Democrats believe that they would have kept their congressional majority in 1994 if Mr Clinton had pushed a (conservative) welfare reform rather than his (liberal) healthcare programme in 1993.[14] Your premiums have been going up double digits a year for at least ten years. This last year, they only went up single digits. 4. The stimulus was sloppy but necessary to back fill a $2.5 trillion dollar drop in GDP, otherwise unemployment would be higher today and much higher a year from now. (That GDP drop is a quarter of ALL economic activity in the U.S.) "The government should live within its means" is an idiotic statement. It's the government's job to protect tax payers from catastrophic losses and then fund those with new taxes in up years. It is private sector's job to create jobs in the up years since they clearly won't hire in a recession no matter how many tax cuts they get. 5.[3] Even a 1% rise in interest means an EXTRA $600 BILLION per year in interest payments (equal, by itself to a 5% drop in GDP). The spin-off effects of those increased interest payments would likely lead to an ADDITIONAL 5% drop in GDP. This has established the dollar as the NEW "carry-trade" currency. It is an inevitable fact that the carry-trade effectively results in a HUGE increase in supply (of USD's) - further aggravating the fundamentals in (1). 3) The worth(lessness) of the USD. With the dollar no longer backed by gold, this means there is NOTHING "backing" the dollar except the net worth of the U.S. economy.[22]

Anyway, my theory on American elections is pretty much one of economic determinism. Jesus Christ himself couldn't have powered the Democrats to victory in New Jersey and Virginia given the state of the economy, and he wouldn't power them to victory in 2010 if the economy hasn't noticeably improved.[33] What wins elections is the ability to spin it to the moderates (or the Middle). Most moderates are liberal on social issues and conservative on economic issues involving their pocket book. This the President needs to focus on the economy.[4] I think economic policy matters quite a lot. I also think it takes years to play out and for its effects to be fully felt. To put it another way, there is no known method for putting in a strong electoral performance when you take over an economy that A) has been in recession for 13 months; B) when this recession has another half year to go, and, C) when this recession ends a mere four or five months prior to the election. Four or five months simply isn't enough time for voters to start feeling better about their economic prospects.[33] I don't necessarily disagree with this. I don't think many voters possess much in the way of economic literacy, and I think they therefore are apt to substantially underestimate the amount of time necessary to turn around a battleship the size of the U.S. economy.[33]

It's the economy and policies tied to the economy. Higher debt, higher taxes (cigars, cigarettes, candy, soda, guns, gas, oil,. eventually income), higher energy costs, no energy plan, legislation being passed w/o being read, crap & tax bill, labor unions getting clout, more regulations, gov't tearing up legal contracts, gov't takeovers, no small business incentives in stimulus, a $1T healthcare bill that will still leave 25-30 million uninsured and anti-business rhetoric from this administration are holding the economy down. I can't imagine why businesses in the U.S. aren't hiring and why businesses from other countries aren't knocking down our doors! This administration is an economic joke.[9]

Watching a Marxist supposedly try to stimulate a capitalist economy is comical. Wonder what Barack will do when Russia invades one of it's neighbors this coming spring now that they have tested Barack and found him to be a wimp. It, like the economic downturn, is not on his socialist agenda. They recently practiced invading Poland with their last combined war games. It would be sad watching NATO crumble as Obama ignores that distraction to his socialist agenda.[21] Right now Barack is the winner hands down. Obama is the epitomy of a unpragmatic ideolog, ignoring the economy to implement his socialist agenda and desguising his big governement agenda as an "economic stimulus package".[21] "The work continues, but we're moving in the right direction," Obama said. The second obligation, he said, is making "long-term investments" needed to rebuild the economy stronger than ever. That includes health care,''''energy development and -- the main topic of this speech -- improved education.[31]

The religious dogmatism and "market fundamentalism" of the Bush administration were entirely discredited. "During the two terms of George W. Bush," Tanenhaus declares in his latest book, "conservative ideas were not merely tested but also pursued with dogmatic fixity." Even worse than being brain-dead, the right is black-hearted, hating good-and-fair Obama for his skin color and obvious do-goodery.[25] Are we leading out of fear, or out of respect? As thrilled as the world is to see a new administration in power, no one will truly feel at ease until the Obama administration takes a firm stance. They need to create an irrefutable distance between the America now and the America of the Bush administration.[29] Because of Bushs adventures in Iraq and Afghanistan a larger part of the globe has developed intense hatred for America. When an ordinary South American utters the word America his tongue burns. When an ordinary African utters the word America his tongue burns. When an ordinary Iraqi utters the word America his tongue burns. When an ordinary Afghan utters the word America his tongue burns. When an Iranian utters the word America his tongue burns. Would it be possible for Obama to extinguish these burnings? Lets wait and see. This news was published in print paper.[48]

In a Court filing late Friday night, the Obama Administration attempted to dress up in new clothes its embrace of one of the worst Bush Administration positions--that courts cannot be allowed to review the National Security Agency's massive, well-documented program of warrantless surveillance.[13] In a sharp departure from the Bush administration, the Obama team has halted new uranium-mining claims near the Grand Canyon, proposed new preserves for wild mustangs and funded the expansion of the Petrified Forest National Park.[23]

Obama's first budget included $4.5 million to help pay for the expansion of the Petrified Forest National Park, Dahl said. Although Congress had approved the expansion during the Bush administration, Bush did not include any funding for the project in his budget, he added.[23] Yeah, so much for being for the little guy (not that anyone with a BRAIN should be surprised). We can go on and on about the corruption within his own administration. All of his Czars (who weren't vetted at all, certainly didn't have to be approved by congress like the cabinet does) are some of the most corrupt people around. He's got a tax cheat running, you guessed it, the IRS. People aren't just calling him Bush V.2 (or 3) to be funny, it happens to be true. He spend a year and half campaigning against Bush's reckless spending, and here he is, within his first year, outspending Bush.[1]

"powerful and independent fiefdoms characterized by entrenched agendas and constant intrigue, have ways of dealing with those who won't come to heel. This deep-seated inertia may help people who are disillusioned with Barack Obama to understand his obstacles. Howard Zinn recently expressed such disappointment, by saying, "there's an enormous weight left over by the Bush administration. Unfortunately, he has done nothing to begin to lift that weight[49] I fully agree with giving Obama a fair chance and providing all the necessary assistance to achieve the goals that would help the nation prosper. To go on about the historic achievements when in fact there has been not one positive aspect of this administration to date, particularly from people who are so hair-triggered to accuse any non-Obama president of causing all the world'''s ills, is hypocrisy and dishonesty and it drives me nuts, though that may indeed be a short trip.[21] If Pres. Obama was attempting to imprison or fine people for opposing speech, rather than using his own free speech to criticize opponents, as past presidents have all done, then you might have something.[21]

Regardless, the mid-term elections will seriously weaken Mr. Obama if there isn't measurable improvement in our country about 300 days from now. I predict in 2012 election, Mr. Obama will replace Carter as the best contemporary example of a one-term President, and reaffirm the fact the country isn't ready to move as far to the left as he wanted.[4] The difference (if there is one) is Mr. Obama has awakened people. He awakened the young and disaffected independents during the election, and now he has awakened ordinary conservative folks (also largely independent) with his policy choices. They will be his undoing if things do not get appreciably better in this country in the next 9-10 months.[4]

I think Obama's calculus is more about healthcare. He wants to get it passed before either pissing off his base by doing what McChrystal wants or pissing off moderates by ceding half the country to the Taliban (or pissing off everyone by doing something in between). Obama has his political advisers in on the military planning, which Bush tended to avoid.[33] I think Obama is great. I never thought he could instantly fix the mess that resulted from Bush and Cheney running the country. Some of their mess may never be fixable. I see him as a man to guide the country on a path to recovery.[4]

Let's put some facts on the table for Mr. Obama. Since Obama has been in office, he has blamed Bush or America for every fault in the world. He has accused this great country of being dismissive and arrogant. It would behoove him to look in a mirror when he's not in front of a camera and examine his conscience if he has one.[35]

Predictably, nearly eight-out-of-10 Democrats (79%) see the Bush recession as chiefly to blame, while 71% of Republicans say Obama'''s economic policies are at fault.[28] Voters are already recognizing the writing on the wall and are falling away from Obama and the Democrats. Independents who gave Obama his comfortable victory have now swung against him, recently electing Republican governors in New Jersey and Virginia to succeed Democrats. This is a protest vote, not a confidence vote in Republicans.[44] I think the Republicans really blew it. They might have had a few good ideas, but by refusing to play the game and by deciding to just be obstructionist they lost the chance to influence the bills. Why should the Dems accept Republican amendments if they can't even get one Republican vote? The name of the game is compromise. I would like to see a Ron Paul ticket (because that would help Dems) but he will never get the Republican nomination. All of the libertarians and listeners of Glen Beck should direct all of their anger and energy into changing the political system so their vote for Ron Paul isn't a spoiler vote that would put another Democrat in.[36] I think that failure to pass would actually be better for moderated Dems in 2010 than passing an unpopular bill. thus the constant delays that make failure more likely. Dems who were against Clinton's HC reform bill were re-elected in greater percentages than those who were in favor of it. That's a good one. The Democrats who lost their seats in 1994 were situated disproportionately in conservative areas of the country. It would be hard to prove either way, since the legislation never came to a vote, and it's possible some lawmakers voiced both support and criticism of the Clintons' proposal. On this one I call bullshit.[33] I still think any rational analysis by Democrats -- and not conservative concern trolls -- strongly argues in favor of making sure a bill gets to Obama's desk. Modest though it may be, the proposed expansion of social insurance is a potential game-changer, and both parties know it, and are acting (and will continue to act) with this knowledge in mind.[33]

Obama is already set on the course to a one-term presidency. He promised change, but has delivered none. His health care bill is held hostage by the private insurance companies seeking greater profits.[44] Just 42% now support the health care reform plan proposed by Obama and congressional Democrats.[28] Exploding health care costs, with neither party having a serious interest in controlling costs (the Republicans wanting to continue the current mess as is, the Democrats wanting to tweak the system a little to add coverage for the uninsured). 4. The dominance of both parties by Wall Street bankers (who have the philosophy privatize the gains, socialize the losses); thus both parties favor massive banking bailouts--as well as numerous other special interests. 5. Both parties supporting massive, increasing deficits (the Democrats more by spending on social programs, the Republicans more by tax cuts for the rich, expanding defense spending). 6.[22] Very good post. Don't know if you happened to hear but the Repubs just had their health care proposal scored by the CBO. Although the number of uninsured stays about the same it does say that premiums will go down. That in and of itself can lead to morer people getting insured, or at least more $$in our pockets for us to chose to do so. You give some good reasons why the polls say that people don't consider themselves republican, but they do consider their values to be conservative. Jimmy Carter's greatest acheivement was that he opened the door for one of the greatest Presidents, Ronald W. Reagan.[36] Next came RNC Chairman Michael Steele'''s apparent warning shot to moderate Republicans who supported the stimulus or health care. '''We'''ll come after you,''' he relayed to ABC. (An RNC spokeswoman told First Read that Steele was referring only to House members, and not a single House Republican voted for the stimulus, and not a single one is expected to back health reform.) Da Club targets Crist: Further stepping on the NY-23 narrative, the Club for Growth is running its first TV ad targeting Charlie Crist.[7] The real difference though is honesty- The Republicans intentionally built the debt through overspending and cutting taxes (to the wealthy) so that the argument "we can't afford health care reform" (or any other progressive program) could be made. That is simply immoral[20]

The crown jewel of the president's promises, health care reform, is a work in progress.[8] One the one hand, there is some danger of flak from the left if the party goes into the midterms without health care reform (or climate change, etc.) being done. Many Dems will likely see that as being less dangerous to their careers than the repercussions of health care reform actually passing.[33] We're all in a holding pattern waiting for health care and Afghanistan, regulatory reform, climate change, and a host of smaller issues.[33]

Its clear that businesses have no confidence in Obungler and his Chicago Gang. They keep shedding jobs. wait until we smother businesses with health care "reform" and cap and trade. As a business owner I watch these numbers to help gauge the economy, but I am amazed that most economist have yet to figure out one simple thing in business.[7]

Update : Senior Congressional Democrats told ABC News today that there would likely be no health care bill in 2009.[33] I am talking about the pres. He says one thing then the next says another to contridict what he said the week before. He said tax dollars not to pay for abortions, but the health care bill does not put it in exact words. The bills skirts around the issue, therefore can be twisted to please whom ever he wants. That is on example.[9]

Most voters expect the plan if passed to drive up health care costs and hurt quality and expect a middle-class tax hike to pay for it. For nearly four-out-of-five voters, the bigger problem for the country is not their unwillingness to pay higher taxes. It'''s their elected representatives''' refusal to cut government spending. Sixty-two percent (62%) of Americans say it'''s always better to cut taxes than increase government spending because taxpayers, not bureaucrats, are the best judges of how to spend their own money.[28]

George Bush was elected by the American people to serve as President for 8 years.[7] Tragically, now thirteen people are dead from the Terrorism that took place at Fort Hood yesterday. Do you think that the President of the United States could be a little more sincere and not have to read notes to show sympathy? The only time the President showed any emotion was when he talked himself and that was rude. He did nothing to console the American people.[50] People need to understand that the president may not answer because unlike past presidents he will answer with an intelligent AND truthful response when he is ready and prepared to. He is careful with his words because that is how intelligent, articulate and honest people are. Despite these traits people still question his success as a president: http://tinyurl.com/ygr8vv2 As if 1 year is enough time to tell.[6] We may not get there in one year or even in one term," Barack Obama told the crowd in Grant Park. He still needs time to turn a myriad of campaign promises into policy.[8] Which will echo across Obama'''s second year. About half the voters in each state were '''very''' worried -- and those most anxious voters broke Republican big time.[9] Obama served 3 terms in the state senate from 1997-2004 then ran for the United States Senate. Obama won handily after his opponent went down yet again - this time due to sex scandals. Republicans had put up Alan Keys as a hasty replacement at the last minute but it was too late for them to have any real chance of winning and Obama walked away with it.[41]

Antifascist Calling reported at the time that the Obama administration has argued that under provisions of the disgraceful USA PATRIOT Act, the state is "immune from suit under the two remaining key federal surveillance laws: the Wiretap Act and the Stored Communications Act." Claiming "sovereign immunity" in practice, this means that under DoJ's ludicrous interpretation of the Orwellian PATRIOT Act, the government can never be held accountable for illegal surveillance under any federal statute.[13] EFF's Jewel v. NSA civil suit, brought on behalf of AT&T customers to halt the firm's ongoing collaboration with the government's illegal surveillance continues--for the moment. In April however, taking a page from the Bush/Cheney playbook, the Obama administration argued that this lawsuit too, must be dismissed, claiming that should the litigation go forward it would require government disclosure of "privileged state secrets."[13]

The "change" regime's cynical maneuver to have Shubert kicked to the curb is all the more remarkable considering that the Justice Department announced a month earlier that the administration will "impose new limits on the government assertion of the state secrets privilege used to block lawsuits for national security reasons," The New York Times reported. "Under the new policy," investigative journalist Charlie Savage wrote, "if an agency like the National Security Agency or the Central Intelligence Agency wanted to block evidence or a lawsuit on state secrets grounds, it would present an evidentiary memorandum describing its reasons to the assistant attorney general for the division handling the lawsuit in question."[13] Under the new guidelines, Justice Department officials are supposed to reject the request to deploy the state secrets privilege to quash lawsuits if the Executive Branch's motivation for doing so would "conceal violations of the law, inefficiency or administrative error" or to "prevent embarrassment." While Holder has claimed DoJ's so-called "high-level committee" has reviewed the relevant material and concluded that disclosure would risk "significant harm" to "national security" if the case went forward, security analyst Steven Aftergood wrote in Secrecy News that "one aspect of the new policy that he did not address was the question of referral of the alleged misconduct to an agency inspector general for investigation." This is supposed to occur whenever "invocation of the privilege would preclude adjudication of particular claims," as it certainly does in the Shubert litigation, particularly when the "case raises credible allegations of government wrongdoing." However as Aftergood avers, "somewhat artfully" (although this writer prefers a stronger phrase to describe the Attorney General's actions) "the government denies that any such collection occurred 'under the Terrorist Surveillance Program,' implicitly allowing for the possibility that it may have occurred under some other framework."[13]

Obama's most recent bout of stupidity occurred a few days ago with the campaign blitz for Governor Corzine of New Jersey. Corzine is hated so much that not even Obama could get him elected, and in a deeply blue state to boot. Again Obama should know better than to put his neck on the line for something like this and ultimately he made a fool of himself when Corzine lost. [41] Obama inherited an excellent opportunity to bring U.S. soldiers home from the Bush regime's illegal wars of aggression. In its final days, the Bush regime realized that it could "win" in Iraq by putting the Sunni insurgents on the U.S. military payroll.[44] By mid-October, the figure had plunged to 50 per cent, making Mr Obama's popularity slightly below the average for all U.S. presidents since World War II.[11] The word on the so-called Arab street is that Major Nidal Malik Hasan should be admired because he stood up for fellow Muslims overseas, against U.S. "aggression," and that his anger, disappointment, and presumed sense of betrayal over U.S. President Barack Obama's failure to end the Afghan and Iraq conflicts is understandable, especially in light of Obama's own Muslim heritage.[37] "Yes, we can!" Three simple words propelled Barack Obama into the U.S. Presidency twelve months ago this week. These words summed up his optimistic mandate for change in the U.S. and, for that matter, the entire politics of the globe. Depending on who you listen to, Obama has either begun to deliver on his numerous campaign pledges, or is he leading the nation to ruin. He has been attacked from both the Right of U.S. politics and the Left within his own party.[34]

It's been a year since a healthy majority of American voters elected Barack Obama to change the world. Which is precisely what he's doing.[32]

One year after he was elected, I hope President Obama shifts closer to the center to become the bipartisan president he said he would be.[15] A silent President won't spur legislation. When I try to conjure images of Obama this year, the big moments, I think of a beer summit, a lecture to kids to study, and someone shouting "You lie!" during a speech.[1]

A plurality (49%) of white voters blame Obama'''s policies more. Those earning under $20,000 a year and those making more than $100,000 annually are still far more inclined to blame Bush than Obama. Those in the middle have a different view. Government employees blame Bush much more than those who work in the private sector.[28] Although there was a "budget surplus" in 2000, it never materialized in reality, and was consumed by yet more government spending. In no year did the national debt ever go down under Clinton, nor did he leave President Bush with a surplus.[22] A courageous President has taken on the shameful legacy of the Bush years. He has invited, and desperately needs, a groundswell of public participation to put things right.[49] When Republicans lost the same gubernatorial races four years ago, analysts correctly said it reflected the growing unpopularity of President Bush. We shall see if these losses foretell a Republican comeback.[19]

Right-wing bloggers are fuming at his "crass insensitivity". Some are comparing Mr Obama's words to President Bush continuing to read My Pet Goat to a class of children as he heard about the 9/11 attacks.[47] I wonder how many media outlets will compare Obama's performance to President Bush's "Pet Goat" moment on 9/11.[51]

If you're upset about Obama's comments, then you're either a colossal idiot or a morally bankrupt partisan hack. What do you think Bush could've done within those 7 minutes to save lives or kill terrorists? Do you not think that people of all walks of life -- be they politicians, generals, cops, or dare I say, our Holy One. --reacted awkwardly upon hearing that news? Most very likely were incredulous. His policies that followed of course are fair game for criticism, but to harp on something as petty as the "my pet goat" episode, as so many lemmings did, reveals only their superficiality.[51] We do know that NSA's STELLAR WIND and PINWALE intercept programs are giant data mining vacuum cleaners that sift emails, faxes, and text messages of millions of people in the United States. These programs are not, as the Bush and now, the Obama regime mendaciously claim, primarily "targeting al-Qaeda." As Cryptohippie points out in their analysis of current global surveillance trends, "an electronic police state is quiet, even unseen. All of its legal actions are supported by abundant evidence. It looks pristine." Answering those who claim they have "nothing to hide," Cryptohippie argues that "state use of electronic technologies to record, organize, search and distribute forensic evidence" is primarily for use "against its citizens."[13]

I was disgusted. We lost thirteen people yesterday to a terrorist on American soil and Obama could not just give those people respect, give their families some sympathy, and then leave the political stuff for another day.[38] In August 2008, the Obama campaign implored the Justice Department to levy criminal charges against those funding an American Issues Project commercial that proved embarrassing to Obama. Days later, the campaign sent an "Obama Action Wire" to thousands of liberal activists exhorting them to harass Chicago's WGN radio because an on-air guest unearthed university documents that contradicted Obama's claims about his long-time ties to domestic terrorist Bill Ayers.[5] The recession we're suffering from today was caused by the unregulated derivative market which began around 1998. Essentially, this was the trading of good and bad mortgages. I say bad meaning all the sub-prime lending that started under Clinton - and Dodd and Frank so that all Americans could buy homes regardless of their ability to pay their bills. Clinton's top advisors (including Obama retreads Larry Summers, Tim Geithner) and Fed Chair Alan Greenspan refused to regulate this emerging market. They were under the wrong impression that the market would control itself.[20]

Nonsense. They don't dare tempt fate by dragging the debate late into 2010 -- that's true. They're certainly aware that they're better off having Obama sign a bill early in 2010 than none at all. I'm guessing a bill gets signed by January or so, but I'd say they have until as late as April or May if need be. Again, the political calculus strongly favor their getting a bill passed over none at all.[33] This morning I saw Obama come out for a press statement and he was somber as he came to the podium. I thought "I have to give him credit for treating this moment as seriously as it is." I was thinking I would post that thought because I do not get a lot of positive thoughts about his actions. Unfortunately, he gave about 4 minutes to the travesty in Fort Hood, then moved into the political realm to start talking about how he had just signed a big unemployment extension bill, and turned it into a political speech. At that point, I was again shouting at the TV and it was not nice things.[38]

It doesn't. They have less than six weeks to get a final bill approved and on Obama's desk, or it doesn't get done. They cannot drag this debate into 2010, for the political reasons you mentioned. Will they get it done? I don't know.[33]

Unless you refrain from asking even marginally difficult questions of the administration, you are not only boycotted from access to interviews but demonized to boot. Obama scores a twofer: He avoids almost all scrutiny from the mainstream media, scrutiny that even the Founders said is necessary to good government, and he discredits his political critics in the process. What should alarm all First Amendment proponents is that so many liberals don't really champion the free and open expression of ideas; they only support the advancement of liberal policies, even if that means one-sided dominance to the point of indoctrination in our public schools and universities and in the media.[5] In the case of Shubert v. Bush, the Electronic Frontier Foundation represents numerous American citizens suing individual Bush officials, alleging that the Bush administration instituted a massive "dragnet" surveillance program whereby "the NSA intercepted (and continues to intercept) millions of phone calls and emails of ordinary Americans, with no connection to Al Qaeda, terrorism, or any foreign government" and that "the program monitors millions of calls and emails. entirely in the United States. without a warrant" (page 4). The lawsuit's central allegation is that the officials responsible for this program violated the Fourth Amendment and FISA and can be held accountable under the law for those illegal actions.[24] Project supporters say the administration is risking an estimated 1,200 mining jobs and more than $46 billion in state revenue in the process. ''He reversed a Bush administration plan to permit off-road vehicles in Arizona's Grand Canyon-Parashant National Monument.[23]

National Review's Jonah Goldberg agreed that the media had revealed another "shabby double standard" by criticizing Bush's 9/11 response but letting Obama off the hook yesterday. Hot Air's Ed Morrissey, also comparing the incident to Bush's "Pet Goat" moment, said that Obama acted as if the "shooting has intruded itself on his daily business." Watching the press conference live yesterday, we were a little surprised that Obama didn't jump right into his remarks on Fort Hood.[17] Right on Buzz I agree with you 100%. The same vitriolic naysayers from the blog who from day 1 are sorelosers about historic day of Obama's presidency. The same ones if they are old enough who were defending Reagan's 10.3 unemployment by blaming Carter. Sounds familiar? "When are you Lefties going to stop blaming Bush" When you stop drinking the gop KOOL-AID and realize you are being had by them.[7] Acadian, of course there is nothing wrong with Obama giving a shout out to the man. not quite as somber as I would have been, but the point of the post was not to attack Obama but rather to show the huge difference between the left and right. The left savaged Bush for sitting quietly and listening to the children as if he had no idea what to do, when in fact the process of getting AF1 was already started and he was simply waiting for his chief of staff to come give him the word.[38]

To say that it is all Bush's fault is not accurate and to say that Obama should have fixed it by now is just ridiculous. This will take time folks, but just like Rome, we will rebuild.[20] In more than one way, Obama and Bush are very similar to include spending crazily like the money thrown away after Katrina.[7]

Is Obama giving the office the respect it deserves by at least conducting himself like a President? The answer, unfortunately, is an emphatic no.[18] Embracing gay marriage would push Republicans to the left of President Obama, California and now, Maine.[19] I waiting for President Obama to tell us all just how many jobs were "Create or Save" last month.[7] The continental Europeans on the panel all agreed that President Obama had "transformed" U.S. politics. I challenged them to name one specific transformational accomplishment.[14] Brian: You forgot the most important point in judging President Obama's performance so far. He has a "D" next to his name. He can do nothing right in the eyes of the right.[21]

There were images to repair, cowboys to make fun of, and DVD collections to be delivered. This was no time for unpreparedness, and President Obama was up to the task.[16] No Palestinian came into being. When President Barack Obama took over, he also made some promises to the Muslim world. Time is eating his presidency.[48] At the one-year mark since President Barack Obama's election, the results speak for themselves.[21] Few U.S. leaders have captured the enthusiasm of the world as Barack Obama did on election night 2008.[30] I predict, within a week, we will be hearing about Afghanistan. Now that the U.S. elections are over, Obama has what he needs to make his decision.[33]

Obama is hardly the first person to campaign on "change". Every election we get somebody telling us about horrible Washington is and that "how this time it will be different, we promise".[1] Housing markets have stabilized and there is a surge in new buyers due to Obama's first time buyer tax credit.[21]

Not my president, Barack Hussein Obama will have us all goose stepping with the rest of hte world in his new socialist world order.[4] Trying to make the claim that Obama has been a bad president is ludicrous. Despite Republicans completely rejecting all attempts to work in a bipartisan fashion, he has managed to accomplish some things that are little short of amazing.[21] After the echoes of the president's acceptance speech dissipated and the confetti was swept away, America began to swell with anticipation and political writers had to get used to appending every other word with "-elect" and "-designate." We were then treated to insanely detailed reports about Obama's every move, and learned that he goes to the gym an awful lot.[42] Becoming equal partners with the President means rising above our negative projections, and viewing the timeworn knee-jerk hostility to political leaders for the lazy destructive habit it is. Massive support for Obama's social service agendas, through letter writing, demonstrations, and grassroots websites, will help him to reduce the enormously expensive subsidies, defense contracts, earmarks, and bailouts that are ravaging the public purse.[49]

As an anxious nation looked for reassurance, it saw a president conducting business as usual, seemingly unaware of the magnitude of the tragedy. By the time he got to his statement, the damage was done. It was Mr. Obama's "Pet Goat" moment.[43] Compared with other members of Obama's cabinet for whom Gallup has data, Gates is rated more positively than Vice President Joe Biden but less positively than Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.[12] Obama hits the late night circuit. In March he became the first sitting President to go on a late night comedy show when he went on the Tonight Show with Jay Leno. This was bad enough before he decided to poke fun at the Special Olympics.[18] We'll see how much the U.S. has progressed in three years when the end of Obama's first term is up.[40] Today Asylum's Caleb Howe looks back on the first year of Obama's term from a conservative perspective.[16]

The debacle with Henry Gates highlights the angry and the dumb of Barack Obama. Angry because He immediately assumed that since the cop was white and the "victim" black that the cops must have "acted stupidly", dumb because a 12 year old could realize that was a bad move politically. Another example of the angry side of Obama comes in his willingness to participate in a church where several angry racist preachers performed on a weekly basis. No one involves themselves with a church like that unless they believe what is being said- this might not necessarily fall under the category of dumb but it definitely falls under angry.[41] There is a meta-joke about Obama jokes that goes something like this. Q: What's the main problem with Barack Obama jokes? A: His followers don't think they're funny and everyone else doesn't think they're jokes.[16]

For the Democrats, that is! The GOP has the luxury of just putting a man on base! Democrats don't have the luxury of nominating anything less than a JFK or an FDR. The left wing world wide is a disorganized amalgam of differing opinions, sitting ducks for a disciplined, Nazi-like top down party like the GOP where issues are not derived from the people but from focus groups, consultants and think tanks who literally manufacture issues based upon how well they 'test'. What really hurts is that for their talk about 'the base', the GOP owes its allegiance to the riches one percent of the U.S. population, a moneyed segment that plays and wins because it writes the rules.[46] We are not the World Police force and it is way beyond high time that we actually practice what is preached in the U.S. Constitution. Everyone has the right to self-determination, even if we don't like the life path they choose. If people are not willing to shed blood to determine how they will live, then we, the U.S., must stay out of their business.[21]

Stop the madness. Republicans, tea baggers and assorted independents have spent the last few moths marching on Washington and shouting down any reasonable discussions on healthcare reform because they don't want "their" tax dollars spent trying to get affordable healthcare for their fellow Americans. They and the right wing talk radioheads pushing this have been screaming night and day. All this time, they have been spending "my" tax dollars paying off terrorists and providing free healthcare to every man, woman and child in Iraq and Afghanistan without one single protest or word of disagreement.[7] I honestly wish common sense would reclaim the Republican party, it was the party of Lincoln. I honestly want an alternative to the Democrats and the Republicans, both of whom are corrupt, bought and paid for by big coprorate interests. Most Americans should realize that and not be brainwashed that politicians have their best interests at heart; their interests lie in getting reelected and that takes big money. For now, the Republicans have been hijacked by the extreme right. and they are quite wrong! It will take a strong and determined Democratic party to lead us out of this bleak wildnerness that has overwhelmed our once great country.[26] However between the stimulus package, cap and trade, government bailouts and government takeovers of business and healthcare; it has become painfully clear that the Democrats have no intention of listening to the American people. Republicans will not be voted back into power on their conservatice philosophy alone. The Republicans are being voted back into power because they are being given another chance to listen to the American people.[36] DB wrote on Nov 5, 2009 11:18 AM: " So Bruce the last Administration was engaged in outrageous spending that was evil, but the extraordinary outrageous spending by the current Administration is OK? Why because this guy is a Democrat and the last was a Republican? In case you have not noticed all the bailouts went to the same financial thieves- the banks. Have you noticed that those who got even more from this administration are now charging we the people 30% interest rates on credit cards? Have you noticed that unemployment continues to rise in spite of the messiahs great stimulus? At least when the former administration created a stimulus plan it was as a tax break that was directed to the people. Not a flat out trillion dollar give away to banks, until the end of said administration and that was spent by both parties again.[20] There is also a difference in the last administrations debt. It's called 9/11 and a war. Weather you agree with that war or not even the Democrats voted for that war before they voted against it. The Democrats have now been in control of both houses of Congress for the past three years and have had a large hand in spending. Especially since their multi-trillion dollar rubber stamping of the current administrations spending.[20]

While 25 years or so is too small to make judgements on which, the Republicans or Democrats, are the better custodians of the U.S. dollar, it is reminiscent of the counter-intuitive result of looking at the returns of the stock market under different political banners.[22] I'm no political expert, but the consensus in DC, left and right, is that the longer it takes, the less likely the bill is to pass at all. That's why Democrats were so eager to jam it through, and why Republicans have been trying to delay as long as possible.[33] I'm no political expert, but the consensus in DC, left and right, is that the longer it takes, the less likely the bill is to pass at all. Sure, this is undoubtedly true -- events, dear boy, and all that. I just think it's been obvious since at least August (when Baucus announced the SFC markup would have to wait until after vacation -- and this, too, was greeted as the end of the world) that no bill was likely to clear Congress before very late in 2009 at the earliest.[33]

I see nothing wrong with the president acknowledging one of our nation's heroes at the beginning of his speech. He was somber when he was addressing the shootings and what he said was appropriate. I think it is crass to try and turn this into something that it is not for no other purpose than to score political points. My son is at Fort Benning right now and my thoughts turned to him as soon as I heard about this. My heart goes out to the families of those who were killed or wounded in this needless act. Yosemite Sam, there is a time and place to discuss political differences and this is definitely not it.[38]

I remember a lot of progressive glee at the prospect of a Kerry victory over George W. Bush in 2004; I thought to myself at the time "not so fast, guys. It's almost impossible to take down an incumbent president several years into an expansion."[33] No one objected when Bush was reviled and called a liar time and time again by the Democrats. Being president didn't protect him.[27] As the Bush presidency waned, the president-elect constantly had to remind everyone that there's only one president at a time.[42]

Erase the mistake of Biden/Obama 08! the mistake was to belive former president bush when he told us that going in to iraq would make us safe. you a very uneducated person that i feel sorry for, you are fulled with hatred and i just hope one day that you realise that the greatest day in america was the day we got george bush out of office and put a man in that will not run away from america problem in stead of causing them.[7] The incoming and outgoing administrations enjoyed great cooperation throughout that was marred only by the Bush administration's denial of the Obamas' request to use the visitor's quarters for a few days.[42] Obama is Bush and Bush is Obama. Challenge yourself to move past the belief in the party of slavery and the Klan and see what Jeff has to offer this great country. It may not be a lot but it will be your gift to us all.[7] It's not about George Bush. It's Obama's show now and his far left agenda is driving the Independents to the Republicans.[9] Take just the last 9 mos. of Pres. Bush's term (no way that Jan unemployment changes are counted on Obama): 5.0% in Apr to 7.6% in Jan, a 2.6% rise or a 52% increase in the rate during those closing 9 mos. of Bush's term.[21] Obama's vision of a rebirth of democracy requires more than a mere election, which scripts government as the authoritarian parent, and its citizens as the helpless (and often resentful) children. His grassroots democracy requires a fundamental change in the governing relationship, with vigilant responsible adults actively exerting influence at every turn.[49] With a 4 party system, no party has a majority to form a stable government. We don't have a four year term like you have and so if there is a minority government, a "no confidence" vote can throw them out and we have new election.[4] The Republican gains on Tuesday give the party new vigor,''and the right''will be out finding good candidates, building up the donor lists and getting ready''for next year'''s midterm elections, in which 36 senators, 38 governors and all 435 representatives must face the music. It won'''t take many Republican victories to change the balance of power in Congress. That's most''true in the Senate, where the Dem'''s have put together a filibuster-proof, but easily upset, 60-seat majority.[45]

"It is they who are re-enacting Stalinism in full purge mode." Stalin's "full purge mode" involved the systematized exile and slaughter of hundreds of thousands (not counting his genocide of millions). The GOP's purge has so far caused one very liberal Republican to halt her bid for Congress. Let me offer a countertheory, admittedly lacking in such color but making up for it with evidence and consideration of what conservatives actually believe. After 15 or 20 years of steady moderation, many conservatives think it might be time to give their ideas a try.[25] Afghanistan is a mess, again because of our detour in Iraq. When one party takes over, the other one gets into its own rebound mode. This time, the Republicans seem to offer no solutions to healthcare or job creation. In eight years of Bush/Cheney, they had one of the worst job creation records in modern times, nothing has changed with that crowd. They still live in a world of trickle down economics and we know that scene as it always ends in debt and deficits.[26]

"I feel he is a bit overwhelmed. I think we just need to give him more time. I still have high hopes for him." "Yes and no ''' one person can only do so much ''' with regard to the Afghan war, he hasn'''t done much to really change that." "I pretty much think he'''s done the best he can do ''' a lot of the challenges he'''s faced weren'''t really part of the campaign process." "Not enough of a good job ''' he'''s made good on some of his promises ''' but he'''s not willing to give up on the idea of bipartisan support when he has enough support to get the job done."[4]

We all need a good dose of common sense and a large reduction of hate. One would think that the Speaker of the House and the Senate Majority leader could pull their heads out of the sand long enough to give that a try. Let's get real, Obama walked into a mess that was truly created by folks from both sides.[9] Obama has both houses of congress, he does not need the support of Beck, Limbaugh, Hannity or any other talk show host.[4]

When it was clear that U.S. voters had decisively sent Obama to the White House horns blared and tears flowed across the U.S. Cheers ricocheted worldwide.[30] The Obama administration is trying to clean up the mess left by the last occupant of the White House, by every measure and with body of work that can truly be described as a disaster.[2] "AP - November 05, 2009 Michelle Obama to Host 'Iron Chef' at the White House Michelle Obama's vegetable garden is about to become a culinary battlefield.[7]

I think that's what we saw last week with the White House lashing out at Fox News. Since narcissists in power keep people around them in a constant state of fear -- everybody gets targeted and feels insecure -- you can expect a ton of dirty tricks in elections to come.[5] Time to give it a rest and start stocking up on ammo and canned goods. ObamaCare is on its way. Heck, the Democrats have actually increased their margin for error in the House thanks to their victory in New York State.[33]

Arizona could soon find itself in the middle of the Obama administration's new push to make solar power and other renewable-energy development a top priority for public land. Twenty-four tracts in six states - Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico and Utah - are under study by the BLM and the Interior Department to see if they can support large-scale solar installations.[23] Much so that it is generally believed and accepted that the U.S. dollar is kaput, done for, worthless. That the blame resides on the shoulders of Obama and his young administration.[22] I am not going to attack Obama for giving a "shout out" to a Congressional Medal of Honor winner, even though it looks really inappropriate to be praising people and chumming it up as you lead into a statement on the murder of a dozen U.S. soldiers and the injury of many more. He probably did not know how to deal with it. We will be flying the flag at half-mast over this latest terror attack.[38] I'm trying to fix that. I know Obama is an easy target for the accusation of "egotist" from people who are so intellectually inferior to him that they couldn't hold up their end of an argument with Obama with a crutch. I've never met the guy, and although I worked on his campaign I didn't vote for him because he seemed to me to be too interested in negotiating with terrorists.[16]

I have no sympathy for folks that want there vote back. I didn't vote for either McCain or Obama, because they were pretty much the same on the one key issue, and that was the economy.[1]

I mean, I know there is only so much work that can be done on it, but your the ship captain, you goals may be getting to the destination on time, safety, customer service, and employee relations, but if the ship is sinking, I expect that you are going to drop most of that and work on the fixing the boat problem. It just sounds ridiculous to be talking about reforming healthcare right now, when we have over 10% (probably much higher) of the public out of work. If he had pretty much stayed on two fronts, dealing with the wars and dealing with the economy, then he'd probably be in a much better position now and if he were to be successful, he'd REALLY be in a great position in a year or two to tackle the rest.[1] Because in my view it tends to be by far the biggest predicative factor when it comes to political outcomes. It's risible to posit that next year's midterms will turn on the rapidity with which Gitmo is closed, or the particulars of GM's policies vis a vis the UAW. Carville was right: It is the economy, stupid.[33]

I wanted Hoffman to win but the Dem was my second choice (before Scozzy dropped.) If you nominate social conservatives who run on a neutral jobs/lower taxes platform (ala McDonnell), you get the best of both worlds. Conservatives are happy to have one of their own and opposition talking about 20 year old theses look ridiculous when you are talking about what people care about. If you nominate a more liberal candidate, he needs to throw bones to the right and the left can use those to attack him as they are actually occurring during the campaign.[33] It is, in fact, the core competency of military leadership. Obama has known that he was COMINCH for precisely one year now. He declared that he had a strategy when he named McCrystal (sp?) back in March. This whole "need to decide upon a strategy" talk is nonsense.[33] Hours after the Fort Hood massacre, a grieving nation looked to the president for consolation and leadership. It got light banter and a "shout-out" before President Obama read a perfunctory statement. The president has always had a reputation for coolness, but in this case, he was utterly detached. He can't blame the scriptwriter for his astonishing lack of empathy.[43] Now as for the Obama bashing regarding Fort Hood- we all know the wingnuts were going to blame/attact/put down President Obama over what happened.[51] Inline with rightwing Obama Derangement Sysndrome (ODS), expect President Obama to be blamed in 3. 2. 1.[7] President Obama heads to Capitol Hill tomorrow to convince on-the-fence lawmakers.[7] The most important thing to President Obama. Those two little letters that all the other messages were built on.[16]

I don't think Obama knows the right answer on Afghanistan; I'm not sure anybody does. Obama's months in office have been so action-packed that it's easy to forget some of the historic steps he has taken: Nominating Justice Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court. [32] What I am meaning is that I think Obama's effectiveness is hindered by the Democratic leadership i.e. Pelosi, Reid. As far as multi-party systems, its has worked in other countries and it will work here if done right.[4]

What scares me most (besides Reid and Pelosi) is that Obama will do anything to avoid defeat. Which means that no matter how hurtful a half-baked campaign idea is to our country and it's future, he will swagger onward until he falls off the cliff (like in that Price is Right game) taking all of us with him. This will be his legacy.[9] A GOP majority is essential for the safety of the country and the world. Even if Obama is defeated in 2012, he will just turn into an angrier version of Al Gore and Jimmy Carter. He will haunt the political future of this country as long as he is alive, because that famished ego never gets enough.[5]

Obama's war against the network is about much more than Fox News. It is about his and his fellow liberals' intolerance for political dissent and their war on political criticism from any corner.[5] Obama has tried to belittle any News organization or political figure who refuses to agree with anything and everything Obama does.[21]

The media narrative, the right wing narrative are just noise. It didn't bring Hoffman a seat, nor did the Obama narrative bring a Democratic governor in either New Jersey or Virginia.[33] The Obama magic was showing up in the most unusual places. Obama is to the right of the Conservatives, but the left was hoping to hitch their wagon to the movement. It hasn't worked particularly well for anyone, and didn't last night.[33]

We, the people who refuse to support Barack Obama have a moral position to stand from as well.[15] Despite the fact his staff was working feverishly to get AF1 ready, and he was attempting not to concern the children, he was attacked. Well, check out the attached video of Barack Obama giving "shout out"s at the entry of his response statement to the horrific shooting by an Islamic member of our armed forces at Fort Hood today.[38]

On January 4, 2005 Barack Obama is sworn in as a U.S. Senator and after accomplishing next to nothing Obama decides to turn things up a notch.[41]

Obama's plan is to slowly take away your choices by making everyone dependent on the governmentcreating a Socialistic Government in 4 short years. [21] Anyway, by the way, editors, Obama has not been in office for a year. He took office in January. ljworld too stupid to realize that apparently.[4] Maybe people are waking up to the fact that the current debt level ($12 trillion) is not only unsustainable according to the Congressional Budget Office, but Obama's budgets will double it by 2019.[9] Put your cards on the table, believe in it and go for it. Don't worry about polls, rightwing radio and TV. They need to affect public opinion. Get inspirational people out there to sell their ideas and it cannot always be Obama. For christs sake, don't use Harry Reid, he's a spineless incompetent wimp.[26] I personally feel that Obama has a lot on his plate, people need to cut him some slack.[21] Basically it is getting to the point where people need to start realizing that maybe Obama isn't the all knowing savior of the world. He is a politician, educated in the halls of the Ivy league, but a politician nonetheless.[41]

Brooks says that Obama needs to play to the middle. ''' hese voters are not turning to government for support. Trust in government is at its lowest level in recent memory.[7] One government lasted only 18 months. How the heck can they accomplish anything in that short time. As for Mr. Obama, what the heck do you expect with the mess he inherited.[4]

Lastly, Obama wants to give fast track citizenship to 20 million illegal aliens, and leave us with the bill. This is change, but not the change I was hoping for.[3] All of the polls indicate that the American public does indeed want change but they are angry because Obama Pelosi and Reid are not pushing hard enough to get that change.[36]

My assertion is different. I believe this president doesn't understand the rhythms, the pulse of the American people. He is not merely outside the main stream. He doesn't even recognize it. He is a basketball player who has been asked to bat. At first I thought his initial popularity would carry him through to a second term. As each day passes and the false, almost inappropriate, gestures register Americans are beginning to recognize this man apart. He is our stranger in a land he doesn't understand.[5] In the first visit by the leader of our most reliable ally, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown presents the American President with a pen holder created from the timbers of the HMS President, the sister ship of the HMS Resolute, which the desk in the Oval Office is made from.[18]

The President calls into the Oval Office the Joint Chiefs, the Head of National Intelligence and the Director of Central Intelligence, the SecDef and Generals Petreus and McChrystal. They all sit down and the President gives them their mission: "Gentlemen, here is what we are going to do: we are going to devote every dollar, every soldier, every intelligence asset, every drop of political capital - EVERYTHING - on getting and killing Osama Bin Laden.[5]

Too bad Barack had to follow W. instead of the president that handed W a huge deficit surplus. Bush doubled the national debt and wasted his deficit surplus. To complain about the Dem trying to clean up after him might say something about Cohen's grasp of the economy.[21] Yeah, the President could have and should have gotten himself up and out of that room, calmly, but immediately. Funny how the wingnuts always think Bush's only two options in this situation was to sit still for 7 minutes reading a kids' book or to run wildly out of the classroom screaming like a little girl.[51] The GOP is a disciplined, top-down monolith. Even when the GOP screws up and runs an idiot like George W. Bush or John McCain, there is the danger that he will win because, on election day, the GOP will close ranks, hold their noses and vote the party line.[46] Soo wrote on Nov 5, 2009 7:32 AM: " Bruce, the mortgage fiasco was fueled by people buying homes they could not afford. Do they not bear some responsibility? It was Frank (D) and Dodd (D) who oversaw the Senate finance committee that reported directly to Bush inquiries that all was well with Freddie/Fannie. While both Bill and Hillary warned Bush about Saddam's WMD's, it was Bill who voiced concern about the looming recession due to the collapse of the.com bubble. 911 was planned under Clinton's watch and the financial blow delivered that day was horrendous.[20] Two things the president opposed in the campaign, mandatory insurance and fines for people who don't have it, are likely to end up in the bill. If 10 months is too short a time to keep promises, it's been plenty of time to break them, starting with transparency. Promised negotiations televised on C-SPAN didn't happen nor did the promise of posting bills on the Web before he signed them.[8] Vice President Biden campaigned in New York for winning congressional candidate Democrat Bill Owens.[35] In 1994, the Democrats went ahead with a budget reconciliation bill that raised taxes, trusting a popular President to help make the case to the voters.[33]

Democrats currently have 258 members, and since we'''re expecting zero GOP votes, that means Democrats can lose 40 members. There are Dems concerned about the public option, abortion, and immigration (Congressional Hispanic Caucus members say they will vote against the measure if it prohibits illegal immigrants from being able to purchase insurance in the exchange). While we expect the House to pass the bill, it'''s important to note that Pelosi has pointedly NOT said she has the votes. Why? Because she doesn'''t have the votes yet.[7] Lets see, unemployment nearly at 10 % (even though we were "back from the brink" at around 9 %) when it wasn't going above 8. I know I know, the "4th quarter numbers were worse than they thought". They couldn't project that, but by-god they can project that the house bill will lower costs of health insurance for americans.[1] In order for a bill to be signed in January, they'd have to have the final version voted out of the House and Senate no later than the first two weeks of January.[33]

Passing the 10% mark: Well, the White House knew it was coming, and now it'''s here: The unemployment rate has topped 10% -- the first time since 1983.[7] Here is the problem for the White House with the unemployment numbers: the economy is still losing jobs every month-190,000 in October, exceeding estimates that we would lose 175,000 last month; the labor force is still SHRINKING, albeit at a slower rate than previous months.[7] Per the AP, '''The Labor Department says the economy shed a net total of 190,000 jobs in October, less than the downwardly revised 219,000 lost in September.''' The unemployment rate increased, from 9.8% in Sept. to 10.2% in Oct. It only took about five minutes for Republicans to pounce on the numbers.[7]

George, it's not just the economy. It's about fiscal responsibility. It's about liberty. It's about oppressive government. It's about corruption. It's about abuse of power. It's about massive debt. It's about leftist Marxist dogma. It's about policies destructive to jobs. It's about our childrens' futures.[9]

If you have 25 employees during the normal economy, but are forced to let people go to make ends meet you can only eliminate so many jobs before you do not have enough people working to keep your business moving at all and have to close your doors.[7]

There has not been one hint, from the inception, of any bipartisan effort to include anyone who does not wholeheartedly believe that taking over 1/6th of the economy, killing off any private enterprise concerned with healthcare and absolutely, beyond any shadow of a doubt, socializing medicine in America. All this has been done is such as way as to carefully and consciously try to conceal any and all details of what is covered, who is covered, how much it costs and who will pay for it from the American people.[21] The Moderates are afraid of how much it will cost and think it will destroy the economy. They see the President as irrational in pushing for it so hard.[4]

The Congress just moved a bit to the left, with Pelosi picking up another vote for national healthcare. I also think Democrats have been given a warning that they must not let next year's media narrative be dominated by talk of failure and incompetence, which makes it imperative that they face next year's midterms with the solid achievement of national healthcare under their belts. [33] Liberty 4 All wrote on Nov 5, 2009 2:15 PM: " The democrats controlled congress for the last two years of the Bush term, the past eight years you are whining about.[20]

The notion that Bush pursued conservative ideas with "dogmatic fixity" is dogmatic nonsense. Most Democrats were blinded to all of this because of their anger over the Iraq war and an often irrational hatred of Bush. Republicans, meanwhile, defended Bush far more than they would have had it not been for 9/11 and the hysteria of his enemies.[25] Without the terrorist hoax, America's wars for special interest reasons would become transparent even to Fox "News" junkies. Ms. deSousa says that "everything I did was approved back in Washington," yet the government, which continually berates us to "support the troops," did nothing to protect her when she carried out the Bush regime's illegal orders. Clearly, this means that the crime that Bush, Cheney, the Pentagon, and the CIA ordered is too heinous and beyond the pale to be justified, even by memos from the despicable John Yoo and the Republican Federalist Society.[44] On September 11, 2001, President George W. Bush, while reading a book to children in Florida called "My Pet Goat," found Andy Card whispering in his ear that America had been attacked and we were at war. Not wanting to drop everything and flee lest he scare the children, the President calmly finished the book, then left to a profoundly changed America.[37]

Oh, dang it! Now I'm confused again. Don't the wingnuts keep on telling us to quit bringing up Bush, 'cause he's no longer president? And don't they also say we're supposed to focus on the now, and not bother about prosecuting torture, and corruption, and other traitorous things the previous administration indulged in? And now they're dragging Bush back out, only to prop him up for false comparisons? Make up your minds, why don't you. oh.[51] A politician is a mysterious creature. He has two passions: making promises and breaking promises. As president, George Bush frequently announced that a Palestinian state would be established before the end of his tenure. With the expiry of his tenure, his promises also expired.[48] The invasion of Iraq was a decision of choice by President Bush. Congress gave him the authority to make that decision with the expressed point to only use that option as the very last resort.[21] Questions linger about the effectiveness of the $787-billion economic stimulus plan proposed by the president and passed by Congress in February. Some in Congress are considering a second stimulus plan to fight the country'''s growing unemployment problem, but 62% of voters oppose the passage of another economic stimulus package this year.[28] The New York Times revealed in April and June that the ultra-spooky agency "intercepted private e-mail messages and phone calls of Americans in recent months on a scale that went beyond the broad legal limits established by Congress last year." A former NSA analyst told investigative journalists James Risen and Eric Lichtblau that he was "trained in 2005 for a program in which the agency routinely examined large volumes of Americans' e-mail messages without court warrants."[13] I n June, Judge Walker dismissed EFF's landmark Hepting v. ATT lawsuit, when he ruled that the telecoms enjoyed immunity from liability after the Democratic-controlled Congress rammed through the despicable FISA Amendments Act (FAA) in July 2008. That law, passed in response to citizen challenges to the state and their corporate partners in crime, granted the Attorney General exclusive power to require dismissal of the lawsuits "if the government secretly certifies to the court that the surveillance did not occur, was legal, or was authorized by the president," the civil liberties' watchdog group wrote in June.[13]

Before he got to the issue on everyone's mind - namely the deaths of Americans in uniform - the president gave a "shout-out" to government bureaucrats gathered for a previously scheduled conference at the Interior Department, complete with appreciative chuckles. He treated the event like a pep rally rather than a tragic occasion with a wider audience than those gathered in the room.[51] "If you look at the deployment of U.S. forces in Afghanistan, as against other NATO country forces in Afghanistan, you'll see that undoubtedly the U.S. forces are positioned to guard the pipeline route. It's what it's about. It's about money, it's about energy, it's not about democracy." It was Karzai, the US-imposed "president" of Afghanistan, who has no support in the country except for American bayonets. Ambassador Murray was dismissed from the UK Foreign Service for his revelations.[44] The kidnapped person was renditioned to the American puppet state of Egypt, where the victim was held for years and repeatedly tortured. The case against him was so absurd that even an Egyptian judge order his release. One of the convicted CIA operatives, Sabrina deSousa, an attractive young woman, says that the U.S. broke the law by kidnapping a person and sending him to another country to be tortured in order to manufacture another "terrorist" in order to keep the terrorist hoax going at home.[44]

While providing few details on how NSA will use the 1.5 million square foot center, Glenn Gaffney, a deputy director of intelligence with the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), claims that NSA will "protect civil liberties." "We will accomplish this in full compliance with the U.S. Constitution and federal law and while observing strict guidelines that protect the privacy and civil liberties of the American people," Gaffney said.[13] The U.S. federal government has faith and credit because it has the ability to tax the American people. 2.[22] So the pendulum swings right. When he speaks we question his sincerity on any subject. The Obie files so far are pretty scary and the American people have become indifferent to his radicalism toward the U.S., less the herd of wildebeest that follow him everywhere.[7]

The alleged minority "leader" in Congress, Boehner confused the U.S. Constitution with the Declaration of Independence. It's kind of scary that he's considered a leader of the country when he doesn't know as much about the Constitution as an 8th grader. These are the kinds of stories that the public ought to know about, but they'll have to read web sites like Thinkprogress.org to find out how dangerous the far-out right really is and how much influence they have in the U.S. Congress thanks to ignorant jerks like Boehner.[7] With objective polling language like that, the Dems might as well just concede right now and hand the Congress over to the Republicans.[33] Constituent reaction was supposed to kill ObamaCare over the summer recess, too. The basic proof of the pudding as to why your (and all similar) anti-ObamaCare analysis is pure BS comes from following it through to its logical solution. If ObamaCare is such a disaster waiting to happen, the Republicans should be doing everything in their power to make sure just enough of their caucus combine with liberal congresscritters to A) Make sure it passes, and B) They (the GOP) escape blame. Because surely that would usher in a tsunami of GOP-dominance next November, right? Anyway, it sure doesn't sound like that's what they or you are trying to do. I strongly suspect professional politicians such as incumbent Democrats can see through the concern trolling, too.[33] Predictably, Republican Dede Scozzafava's withdrawal from the congressional race in New York's 23rd District is not only proof the experts are right, but also conveniently a more important story than the Democrats' parlous standing with voters.[25] Hopefully, you will only have to listen to the Republicans' dissent for four. He has not lifted the opinion of the U.S. to new highs. Some countries may have a slightly better opinion of the U.S. He has done absolutely nothing to unite Republicans and Democrats. His attitude of I won and everything will be done my way, is not at all bipartison.[21]

Don, the governor elections in Virginia and New Jersey reflected mostly state issues and leadership abilities. I think the Republicans are reading why to much into these elections.[19] Deeds underperformed Kaine in Loudon County and Virginia Beach (which, of course, happens when you lose a race by 18 percentage points)''' And turnout was about 1.9 million -- which was equal to the '''05 gubernatorial race, but down from 2006 (2.4 million) and 2008 (3.7 million). Things you might not have known about the NJ contest: Sorry, Bruce, this one'''s gotta hurt: If one of us were still working for Asbury Park Press, the daily paper of the Jersey Shore, and home to Springsteen, our headline might be something like this -- '''Shore propels Christie to victory.''' That'''s because Monmouth and Ocean counties, the two counties that make up the Press''' readership, were Christie'''s top two vote-getting counties and saw the biggest increases in total vote for the Republican from '''05 to '''09 (+27,000 in Monmouth and +30,000 in Ocean). The combined vote margin that Christie won by in the two counties over Corzine -- 134,367 -- accounted '''for more than his margin of victory,''' as the Press wrote yesterday''' Corzine also got fewer votes in EVERY single county in the state than he did in '''05, and Christie got MORE votes out of every county than Doug Forrester '''05''' Basically, when you look at the entire state, Corzine got destroyed in the suburbs, and although he held margins in traditionally Democratic Counties around New York City and Philadelphia, he got fewer votes out of them.[7]

The only remaining energy left in the Republican Party lies with Limbaugh, Beck, Fox News, Rupert Murdock, and tea baggers. Michael Steele can not control these people, so they are free to do whatever they darn well please.[7] The battle for the soul of the Republican Party in New York's 23rd congressional district went to the conservatives.[19]

The party made the political calculation that John McCain -- another unorthodox and inconsistent conservative -- was the best candidate to beat Obama.[25] Liberal Democrats for whom Clinton or Obama are too conservative will pout and stay home.[46] Unless you shower Obama with adulation 24/7, you are ripe for targeting. They will abuse the power and prestige of the office of the presidency to "call you out." They have personally called out Rush Limbaugh and other media critics. They've targeted conservative talk radio for neutering, having assigned a Federal Communications Commission diversity czar that very task.[5]

On national security, Obama moved at once to categorically renounce torture. It looks as if Obama will miss his self-imposed one-year deadline for closing the Guantnamo prison, but a delay of a few weeks or months will be worth it if the administration succeeds in developing a comprehensive legal framework consistent with our ideals and traditions for bringing terrorism suspects to justice.[32] The Obama administration also has ensured that money from the federal Land and Water Conservation Fund is used to benefit Arizona national parks, said Kevin Dahl, Arizona program manager for the National Parks Conservation Association.[23] Among the places that stand to benefit from the new emphasis on protection is Arizona's Grand Canyon-Parashant National Monument, which the Bush administration had planned to open up to off-road vehicles, said Nada Culver, senior counsel for the Wilderness Society's BLM Action Center. "The BLM has now made it clear that conservation trumps other uses, and that's good news for everyone who wants to see these special places protected for future generations," she said.[23] A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 49% still blame the economic situation on the recession that began under Bush.[28]

This is all simple to me. It's been 10 months since Bush left office, a year since the election and 14 months since the economic collapse.[33] Compounding problems on the president's lengthy to-do list is that 2010 is an election year, generally an inefficient time for lawmaking.[8] It doesn't matter what the 'narrative' is. All that matters is what moderate Democrats in both houses up for election next year saw.[33] Going into Tuesday, Republicans needed to pick up 40 seats next year to make John Boehner the Speaker of the House. They now need 41.[19] If the Republicans could have sped up the midterms to yesterday, we'd very likely be looking at a flipping of the House -- or at least very deep losses (IIRC Ronald Reagan lost nearly 30 seats in 1982). I doubt with eighteen months or so of GDP expansion under their belts and the passage of national healthcare, Democrats will fare as badly as Reagan did back then next November.[33] The Democrats absolutely need a major legislative victory with which to face the electorate next November, given the strong likelihood of lingering economic weakness. They won't repeat the mistake of 1994, not with their margins in both houses.[33]

U.S. Representative Dennis Kucinich, who is now without a doubt a marked man on AIPAC's political extermination list, asked the House if the members had any realization of the shame that the vote condemning Goldstone would bring on the House and the U.S. government. (View here ).[44] The entire rest of the world accepts the Goldstone report. The House answered with its lopsided vote that the rest of the world doesn't count as it doesn't give campaign contributions to members of Congress. This shameful, servile act of "the world's greatest democracy" occurred the very week that a court in Italy convicted 23 U.S. CIA officers for kidnapping a person in Italy. The CIA agents are now considered "fugitives from justice" in Italy, and indeed they are.[44]

Then there is also the U.S. Congress which is even worse than the Knesset, and which has voted against the Goldstone report with a majority of 344 votes to 33. In the meantime, Netanyahu and his foreign minister are negotiating this week in the U.S, while the Israeli officials with the exception of Avigdor Liberman are spending as much time in Washington as they do in their own offices. This is all while the Arab countries are all weak and are disputing among themselves. While most of the Arab countries support Abu Mazen in their declared stances, some amongst them are fuelling the strife, but which ultimately remains the responsibility of the Palestinians before anyone else.[39]

The information gathered by the secret state and stored in huge data warehouses scattered across the country "is criminal evidence, ready for use in a trial," and "it is gathered universally and silently, and only later organized for use in prosecutions." In an Electronic Police State, every surveillance camera recording, every email you send, every Internet site you surf, every post you make, every check you write, every credit card swipe, every cell phone ping. are all criminal evidence, and they are held in searchable databases, for a long, long time. Whoever holds this evidence can make you look very, very bad whenever they care enough to do so. How does this "quiet, pristine" system operate? As AT&T whistleblower Mark Klein revealed in a sworn affidavit that described how the company physically split and copied the traffic that flowed into its offices, NSA was virtually duplicating, sifting and storing the entire Internet. What screams out at you when examining this physical arrangement is that the NSA was vacuuming up everything flowing in the Internet stream: e-mail, web browsing, Voice-Over-Internet phone calls, pictures, streaming video, you name it.[13] Unemployment continues to rise, North Korea and Iran continue to be pests, Hugo Chavez is emboldened, eco-radicals are taking over the legislative agenda, and Nancy Pelosi is dictating how health care will work in America. A number of friends in the military have told me that as Commander-in-Chief they must respect the office but they do not respect the person.[18] Polls show Americans back health care reform and a majority want a public option, too.[19] "Traitor to the U.S. Constitution." Another sign showed pictures of dead bodies at the Dachau concentration camp and compared health care reform to the Holocaust.[21] Health care reform designed to put private businesses in the gutter. 10% unemployment.[1] If health care reform isn'''t decided by then, it'''s unlikely to happen in 2010.[45]

In place of health care for Americans, there will be more profits for private insurance companies.[44] Being for gay marriage and unrestricted abortion are outside the mainstream - as are the $787 billion stimulus, the takeover of the auto industry, and a government takeover of health care. That last one is incredible.[19] "Anyone who tries to nationalize the election around health care and Afghanistan is nuts," Rollins noted.[45] The health care debate is staggering into 2010, climate change action remains stuck in committee and amnesty has dropped out of the discussion altogether.[14] I might not of done health care in the summer and focused more on the wars. He is at least doing something about it.[1] If the Health Care fiasco wasn't an obvious scrum, with no sense of purpose or direction beyond political expediency.[33]

We have seen what appeasement has done in the past for dictators that have chosen torture and violence as a means of intimidation. Take the 1946 Nuremberg trials, known for the prosecution of prominent members of the political, military and economic leadership of Nazi Germany after its defeat in World War II. These tribunals were created in order to hold accountable those who performed horrifying acts of torture on people in prison camps. It served as the model for the International Military Tribunal for the Far East, which tried Japanese officials for crimes against peace and humanity. It also served as the model for the Eichmann trial and for present-day courts at the Hague for trying crimes committed during the Balkan wars of the early 1990s. A set of trials was set up at Arusha, intended to condemn those people responsible for the genocide in Rwanda. Imperialist powers like Great Britain were morally powerless to protect people of their former colonies after powe vacuums in Africa saw torturous atrocities like those in Uganda with Idi Amin. [29] Obama is bogus though. This was no economic Chihuaua turd left on the WH steps in Jan., it was more like an elephant turd on fire.[21] Obama get's an F for not bringing the troops home which was a large part of his campaign. Other then that, I think he is doing as best as anyone could expect considering the difficult economic situation.[4]

Someone has to take the high ground; someone has to be the leader. While I am every bit a proponent of moving forward from such a terrible administration, we need to hold Obama accountable for making sure such progress occurs, starting with a rectification of our past.[29] Obama campaigning: "A little bit of rain never hurt anybody." America needs to get over its tolerance for lying.[49] In a more recent example we have Obama rushing out to Copenhagen to attach himself to the Olympic bid. In a display of pure unadulterated arrogance Obama and his wife pounded the committee with self pity - Obama seriously alluding to the idea that the Olympics should be held in Chicago so they would be near his home, and Michelle waxing on eloquently about her family problems. Here is where their ego's are made flagrantly obvious as they both honestly thought that they would simply be so charming and wonderful that the entire world would literally just vote for them - thankfully for Chicago the world isn't as stupid as much of America was in 2008. This wasn't just egotistical- it was also pretty stupid.[41]

Obama also signed into law the Omnibus Public Lands Management Act of 2009 that protected thousands of miles of scenic, historic and recreational trails, including the 807-mile Arizona National Scenic Trail from the state line with Mexico to the Utah border. [23] I think there should be public referendums on major national issues. While I think states should have some control over the use of federal dollars, it shouldn't for everything, like unemployment benefit extensions, which in this backward state is impossible to get.[4] With a less-than-zero net worth for the United States AND no possibility of simply breaking even on a cash-flow basis, the ability of the U.S. government to tax becomes irrelevant with respect to providing any "value" to the dollar.[22] The full faith and credit of the U.S. Federal Government itself, is backed up by the full faith and credit of individual states, and the people, in supporting the federal government. Such faith and credibility is fading, unfortunately. Note, individual state and individual rich persons, CAN choose to walk away from that faith and credit in the U.S. federal government, and remove themselves from the jurisdiction, if they believe this government is no longer acting on their best interest.[22]

With $60 trillion in public/debt, plus ANOTHER $70-$100 trillion in "unfunded liabilities" (for the federal government), the net worth of the entire U.S. economy is a huge, NEGATIVE number. This means the actual VALUE of a U.S. dollar today is ZERO. To suggest that a worthless currency, with horrible supply/demand fundamentals can go anywhere but DOWN is (to be polite) wishful thinking.[22] The U.S. economy is carrying roughly $60 TRILLION in total public/private debt. This means the U.S. government can NEVER (voluntarily) afford to raise interest rates again.[22]

What makes the dollar weakness so frightening are the long-term reasons for pessimism: America has debts it cannot pay, and foreign investors know it. They are buying gold and Euros since it's clear that the math doesn't work anymore for the debt-addicted U.S. economy.[22] The dollar is NOT based on the full net worth of the U.S. economy. It is based on something much less, and become even lesser. 1.[22] Jeff: I agree with most of what you say. I take problem with the follow paragraph: "3) The worth(lessness) of the USD. With the dollar no longer backed by gold, this means there is NOTHING "backing" the dollar except the net worth of the U.S. economy.[22]

In 1934 the U.S. economy grew by more than 10 per cent, in 1935 by almost as much, and most Americans confidently assumed that the Depression had been left behind.[14]

The U.S. House of Representatives has just voted to show the entire world that the U.S. House of Representatives is nothing but the servile, venal, puppet of the Israel Lobby. The House of Representatives of the American "superpower" did the bidding of its master, AIPAC, and voted 344 to 36 to condemn the Goldstone Report.[44] As the House gets ready to take up the $1.2 trillion sweeping health-care proposal, Democratic leaders are struggling to round up the 218 needed for passage, with the party's. General Motors (majority owner, U.S. taxpayers) is trying to rescue its European subsidiary Opel after backing out of a plan to sell the company to a consortium led by.[6] Excuse No 1 is true but irrelevant. The President's party holds big majorities in both the House and Senate, the largest enjoyed by any president since Lyndon Johnson.[14] It's a hoary cliche of movies and television shows about the White House: A clamoring press corps, jostling and barking questions at the president.[6] "The environmentalists have been waiting in the wings for eight years," said Paul Lewis, assistant professor of political science at Arizona State University. "Now, they have a chance to be heard again." Environmentalists' allies in Congress say they are hopeful their legislation can become law now that they have the support of the White House.[23] I mean domestic terrorists, like people who show up to town hall meetings with photoshopped pictures of Obama/Hitler, packing heat, all full of steam but no facts. We WON. So despite your protests, your lame-ass commentary, your never-ending conspiracy theories, your hate/threat tactics, we still got both Houses of Congress and the Executive Branch.[16] You guys will have another shot at Congress -- all 435 House seats and a third of the Senate -- a year from now. Although I can understand your disappointment at having to wait for another year of GDP growth until you get this shot.[33]

"The soft bigotry of low expectations" needs to be reversed in our public schools. Obama is putting teeth in to this statement - by tying teacher performance to test scores using $5B awarded by Congress as part of stimulus. [3] Obama is kinda/sorta falling into that mold. He got where he was by persuading the public. If he wants healthcare reform so damn bad, he needs to go out and make his argument again and again and again. Just the basic desire from him isn't enough. He was voted in, but that doesn't mean 100% of his agenda was supported by his electorate.[1]

Common Man wrote on Nov 6, 2009 11:16 AM: " Hey folks, Rome wasn't built in a day and neither was this recession. It started on GW's watch, (he authorized the first $700 Billion in TARP funds remember?) and it will be resolved on Obama's watch.[20] In the final days before the election, three newspapers that endorsed John McCain were booted from the Obama campaign bus.[5]

We can all judge Pres. Obama before too much longer on how well he picked up responsibility as Commander-in-Chief for these two wars and the results.[21] Well, now that Bush the Third is installed in office it is all falling into place. nothing to see here folks, just the same old Bush snow job with the yellow trickle down helping us to our knees and graves.[9] The Republicans didn't make the jobs. The people voted in the only jobs they could.[9] The American people have not forgotten that the Republicans made some big mistakes over the last decade. To say their hands are clean would be laughable.[36] If we have to go into Pakistan to get him, do it! We are in there secretly anyway. "This was why we went to Afghanistan originally - and the American people want to know why - after eight years - we have failed to do what we said we would do. "So, we are going to get him. This single action will decapitate Al Qaeda and render it a weakened, disorganized entity that will then no longer be a threat to us.[5] Ambassador Murray reports that the people delivered by CIA flights to Uzbekistan's torture prisons "were told to confess to membership in Al Qaeda. They were told to confess they'd been in training camps in Afghanistan. They were told to confess they had met Osama bin Laden in person. The CIA intelligence constantly echoed these themes." "I was absolutely stunned," says the British ambassador, who thought that he served a moral country that, along with its American ally, had moral integrity.[44]

Americans do not want socialism, out of control spending, and people forced to depend of the government for everything. The voters will take back their liberty and freedom to choose.[21] That would be a godsend for Democrats. I don't know where progressives got this incredibly counterfactual notion that Dems lost Congress in 1994 because Americans were pining for a government takeover of healthcare they didn't get. That just redefines wishful thinking.[33] The tea parties and the town hall meetings could be a precursor of what will happen should Democrats be foolish enough to pass a government takeover of the nation's medical care.[19]

I think part of the solution for democrats and the administration is to do something big. Something they can pass, even on a party line vote, that has an immediate effect. [33] There is no wave to ride anymore. I don't think the Republicans have a wave, and this showed that the Democrats have none either. Next year an angry and uncertain electorate will take their frustrations out on the incumbent.[33] Pyrrhic victory. Another pyrrhic victory, but shorter term (2 years not 6) and at least it will be a Democrat who screws Republicans. Anyone who says this is the start of some sort of huge thing in any direction is totally bullshitting (or just projecting her hopes).[33] Theere is a reason that the Republicans were allowed to toil for 8 years, and it seems the democrats barely get 2 years.[36]

Also Thursday's Tea Party rally in D.C. and patriotic voter outrage the rest of the year. Ideological Purity Is In Their DNA: Following the defeat of candidate Hoffman in NY 23, some pundits thought the conservatives would rethink their strategy of undermining moderate Republicans.[7] Democrats portray Republicans as being in the Party Of No. No is sounding pretty good these days.[19] All in all, a very satisfactory night for Democrats. After all the hype about a Republican surge, anything less than a sweep was a disappointment for them. At the end of the day, in opting for the "anti-incumbent" in their respective governor's mansions, it was business as usual in NJ and VA.[33]

Democrats want people to see Republicans as extremists who oppose gay marriage and abortion.[19] Governors races are decided locally. The only races affecting DC were the congresional ones and Democrats won both. People are sick of the extremist GOP and their Christian right allies with their tax cuts for gazillionaires and unnecessary wars costing lives over nonexistant weapons.[19] The reason we criticize Bush is because the correct course of action is so blindingly obvious: leave quietly right away. Geez, people step out of meetings at work when their friggin' cell phone starts vibrating. It's not that hard.[51] Mike J wrote on Nov 5, 2009 6:44 PM: " You are kidding me right? Letters continue to come into this paper that amaze me as to the propaganda spread with no facts. It's all the Republicans fault. great and you are the "tolerant" people.[20] I thought dissent was patriotic according to the left, oh thats right, only when you agree with their agenda. Is this what you are refering to, from then Senator Clinton, "I'm sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and disagree with this administration, somehow you're not patriotic.[1] We need to stand up and say we're Americans, and we have the right to debate and disagree with any administration."[1] We will need to address the debt that has increased due to bail outs caused by horrid economic policy left over by the Bush administration.[26] For eight years, the Bush administration crafted policies that opened doors wider for multiple uses on public lands. Users such as mining and logging companies won greater access in some areas, and federal agencies were given greater leeway in allowing development. Conservationists say the damage from those policies was dramatic.[23] Europeans envisioned cooperation after eight icy Bush years, with climate change and dialogue with Iran at the top of the list.[30] Last year the in the Ontario NDP provincial leadership campaign, the woman who won (I think) ran on hope and change.[33]

When it comes to Bush and his "My Pet Goat" I never faulted him from not jumping up the SECOND he got the news of what was going on. Bush was never a very tactful person to begin with- so it better for him to sit there a few moments longer with the small children than to go into his cowboy mode and scare them to death by screeching outloud "we are under attact by unknown forces- I have to go now kids". Yeah as a parent i think it was best that The Shrub kept his mouth shut and sat there for a few moments- for the sake of those kids in the room.[51]

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted articles and information about environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. This news and information is displayed without profit for educational purposes, in accordance with, Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law.[46] The great Anglo-American bastion of democracy and human rights, the homes of the Magna Carta and the Bill of Rights, the great moral democracies that defeated Nazism and stood up to Stalin's gulags, were prepared to commit any crime in order to maximize profits. Ambassador Murray learned too much and was fired when he vomited it all up. He saw the documents that proved that the motivation for U.S. and UK military aggression in Afghanistan had to do with the natural gas deposits in Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan.[44]

While most people are pretty hard to predict, extreme narcissists are comparatively simple. They constantly hunger for ego gratification, they are immature, constantly need to demonstrate their own superiority, often need endless sexual conquests (like Bill Clinton), are manipulative, constant liars, are completely cold about the human beings they harm (like John Edwards), and they deal with frustration by uncontrollable fits of rage.[5] In fact i think a scaled down bill with modest expansion of Medicaid, a fix for MD payments in Medicare and small subsidies is beginning to look like the most likely outcome.[33] Real conservatives like Bill Buckley used to be intelligent, witty and charming.[16]

To follow up on Sierra comments to Big Kev ("Bush had 2 wars to fight") and to remind Bill Burris who said: "The deficit rose under Bush due to the NECESSITY to fight two wars[21] George W. Bush also inherited a recession from Bill Clinton and eight months later, 9/11 struck. Bush never complained of the recession he inherited or the worst attack on this country. He justifiably could have blamed Clinton for his neglect in handling worldwide terrorism.[35]

The relief was great that George W. Bush, one of America's most globally unpopular leaders, was leaving. Was the joy that the once-racially segregated nation had elected its first African American leader - 'a fairy tale,' said Poland's Foreign Minister Radek Sikorski. [30] First: the attempt by Bush to create the ultimate # of American millionaires by transferring $1.3 trillion dollars in taxes to 1.3% of Americans.[20]

First the dollar is based on the full faith and credit of the U.S. Federal Government.[22] Consider the U.S. federal government as a corporation, and the dollar as the stock. This is a now bankrupt corporation which has lost its credit worthness.[22]

Europe thinks, because we have a president who wants the U.S. to emulate European socialism, the U.S. is now a better place. [21] U.S. forces in Iraq still number 120,000. 18 months after he visited the country, the President still has not decided on an Afghanistan strategy.[14]

I take no pleasure in harboring malcontent toward the president of the United States. I''''''''''''''''''ve never disliked an American president throughout my lifetime until now and I can''''''''''''''''''t help but admit that it bothers me that I feel this way. [15] The finding of the Italian court, and keep in mind that Italy is a bought-and-paid-for U.S. puppet state, indicates that even our bought puppets are finding the U.S. too much to stomach. Moving from the tip of the iceberg down, we have Ambassador Craig Murray, rector of the University of Dundee and until 2004 the UK Ambassador to Uzbekistan, which he describes as a Stalinist totalitarian state courted and supported by the Americans.[44]

These wins will mean nothing when these men cannot do what they claim,wouldn't matter which party won.The big problem is that the far religious right is trying to take over the government and if they do there go freedom of religion,they want everyone to believe as they do or be stoned,the American Taliban is there name.Along with that comes the loss of freedom of speech as you will not be allowed to say anything against or about their religion.[9] When will Dems quit looking for a scapegoat, and start shouldering the responsibility for their own failures. This past election was definately a statement to the current Admisitration.Americans do not want to change our system of government.[21]

I believe in principle that a government should deficit spend during a recession to spur the economy, and save for a rainy day when times are good.[1] Lots of (inane, but that's neither here nor there) talk of deathcare panels, socialism, out-of-control borrowing, passport issues, and so on and so forth. This has been widely reported by the national media. Again, I make no claim that every voter is strongly influenced by this narrative, nor that even for those who are, it's the single most important influence -- I think that prize goes to the economy.[33]

"I'm excited that the president has brought in people who are more focused on the real mission of the national parks," Dahl said.[23] Most of us ran on that,''' said Representative Gerald E. Connolly, Democrat of Virginia and president of the party'''s freshman class.[33] Virginia was a given at least a week ago. New Jersey could have gone either way, and with enormous money and support from the President and DNC, they lost badly. NY23 was a weird situation, and if it shows anything at all, is the floor for the RNC. They spent $900,000 on a candidate that backed out and supported the opposition, and still got 5% of the vote.[33] Apparently reacting to reports of workers removing documents from the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) headquarters in New Orleans, Louisiana. Earlier this week, we discussed the White House's was claiming the "stimulus saves nine out of every five jobs."[6] Just as the health-care debate started to heat up again, the White House began what has been dubbed a "war" with Fox News. Were they striking back against provocation or distracting Fox from the health-care debate? Either way, both missions were accomplished.[42] After a while, White House reporters didn't bother unless the news was so huge that not even trying to ask could be a firing offense.[6]

The Food Network announced Wednesday that an episode of "Iron Chef America" will be taped at the White House featuring Mario Batali, Bobby Flay and Emeril Lagasse. The three chefs, joined by White House chef Cristeta Comerford, will be welcomed by the first lady and allowed to use anything found in the garden to help create their meals.[7]

Election Day will be here tomorrow and candidates from both political parties have run spirited campaigns. Next Tuesday, November 3rd Virginians will go to the polls to elect three statewide candidates and their representative for the House of Delegates.[18] First Read is an analysis of the day's political news, from the NBC News political unit.[7] When night fell, and the excitement of our national moment had passed, mobs of the lost wandered in the barren dark, surrounded by endless piles of garbage and miles of fences preventing progress. Life has such an ironic sense of humor, doesn't it? To kick off his new administration, post-partisan Prez extraordinaire adopted the first of many message strategies.[16] The new data center will be located at Camp Williams, a National Guard training facility 26 miles from Salt Lake City in the conservative state of Utah.[13] Democrat or Republican, "liberal" or "conservative:" what matters most for all factions in Washington is the defense and preservation of the class privileges of the capitalist elite. Criminality on such a scale requires that the armed fist of the state is mobilized and ever-vigilant; ready at the nonce to crush anyone who would challenge the prerogatives of our masters.[13] The lesson for Republicans is to not nominate freakin left-center to left-left candidates in conservative districts. I accept that you need a big tent and more left leaning Rs in left leaning districts is fine, but Scozzofova was a slap in the face to conservatives. (As she finally proved beyond all doubt by supporting the Democrat.)[33]

Republicans and Democrats saw opportunities to create new sources of campaign contributions by privatizing as many military functions as possible.[44] The question is not whether or not Republicans or Democrats have historically been better for the dollar; the question is what is going to happen in the future.[22]

The Cap and Trade bill sucks and will never get out of the senate. It could in future years cost every family of four up to $1200 dollars a year. It was shitty legistlation that would "neccessarily skyrocket" electricity bills.[1] Tax and cap, total disregard of the 34 health reform bills put forward by repubs and apologizing around the globe for America.[1] The list of the undones is long, varied and mostly difficult -- immigration reform, new financial market regulations and a game-changing energy bill.[8] Jasper - I think you mid-read the repercusisons of the failure of Clinton to get a HC bill. Dems who were against Clinton's HC reform bill were re-elected in greater percentages than those who were in favor of it.[33]

Pelosi demolished the first bi-partisan, simple and clean TARP bill by giving a finger pointing speech of hate prior to that vote.[9]

Worse --conservative Democrats will join the evil minions and vote for a Bush Jr or a John McCain.[46] Moderate democrats will vote accordingly on things like national healthcare. Which isn't really before them.[33] Not surprising, see point 2. NY-23 -- are the votes of a few dozen upstaters really that meaningful? The angle I like in this is the comparison to Lieberman -- Democrats dispatched him in the primary, but then he won the general and has been screwing us ever since.[33]

I'd be willing to bet turnout is nearly always much lower in these odd year Virginia contests than it is in presidential races. [33] Rollins has masterminded dozens of Republican campaigns over the years, including''Nixon, Ford and''Bush Sr., plus''Reagan'''s 1984 run, in which the former California governor swept every state except Minnesota.[45]

The one big liberal initiative of the Clinton years, the S-Chip programme that broadened government health coverage for under-18s, was passed in the prosperous year of 1997.[14] Meanwhile the Bush Administration spent and spent and spent creating the largest ever federal government (Homeland Security is the largest ever federal agency). A second layer of deficite spending (that no one in Washington, especially Republicans) tried to stop.[20] The democratic congress obligated Bush with the first of the stimulus packages.[20] The beating the dems are going to take in the 2010 elections will largely be governed by whether or not the recession / unemployment deepens, the value of the dollar continues to crash, oil / commodity prices spike, peoples 401K's become worthless again, terrorists attack the homeland again, inflation takes off, or Afghanistan gets appreciably worse. There is a disturbingly high probability any one of those things will happen which will cause the dems to lose control of congress.[4] Somewhere there are people that will read your statement and because of it will equate all Americans as being just like you.[38] All the liberals can come up with is to blame it on Glenn Beck, or Rush Limbaugh or the teabaggers. The main problem is, on the campaign trail, he didn't have to actually tell people what he was gonna do. He could just come up with his cute sayings like Change, and Hope. Now that he's actually pushing his liberal agenda (which again, anyone with a BRAIN saw coming) people are disappointed.[1]

My Thoughts and prayers are with the fine people of Fort Hood and thier kin. In this time of unspeakable tragedy words are not enough but I hope that the families of the fallen can find some comfort in the knowledge that we would do anything possible to ease your burden. It's bad enough when you have to recieve this kind of news from overseas but the ciecumstances here are especially grievous.[7] All of the replies above just confirm that American's can't remember history further back than 9 months. Or, more likely, they were hiding under rocks and not actually reading the real (non-Fox) news at the time, so they missed it all.[21]

Autie, he and his party controls the whole shootin' match, he don't need no stinkin' cooperation, he can just push his agenda down our "collective throats". He and his party knows that's not what Americans vote for so they are spinnin' round trying to slip it pass the voters watchful eyes. 2010 is coming and his reich is nearing an end.[4] Moderates not welcome, minorities not welcome (especially Hispanics), gays and lesbians not welcome, etc., etc. Just a bunch of old (and young) white guys and gals and token pretenders like Steele and Jindal to put on happy faces for the media. Didn't Steele get reminded of his "place" a couple months back when he got too big for his britches with the old white guy/gal republican party.[7] The time for a 'Republican renaissance' ' to quote Michael Steele, the chairman of the Republican national committee ' may not have arrived just yet.[11] "The previous administration was really all about extraction of resources from the land," said Rep. Ra'l Grijalva, D-Ariz., who chairs the House Natural Resources subcommittee on national parks, forests and public lands.[23] Conservationists support the effort in concept but say there could be disputes over where best to develop solar sites that will not harm environmentally sensitive lands. "We want to encourage the administration and the industry to look at areas that have already been disturbed, such as old mining claims in Arizona," said Jeremy Garncarz, managing director for the Wilderness Society's Wilderness Support Center in Durango, Colo., which works on Arizona conservation efforts. "I think there's an incredible opportunity there to get this right from the get-go."[23] I never claimed to be a legal expert, but I can read and people whose opinions I respect a lot more than yours think that GWB and company ought to be behind bars. Personally, I don't care what you think about it so don't bother responding to this point. Or this post for that matter.[16] Whatever may or not me true of 1994, I think we'd both agree people are not "pining for a government takeover of healthcare" in 2009.[33] Explain to me why you think a two party system is really a democratic, represented form of government? Doesn't matter why I say, do, or believe, I can't get by the system.[4]

Somewhere there are people that think because there are Christians that bomb/kill abortion doctors we need to keep an eye on all Christian nuts in the Army. [38] The attack was on civilians and civilian infrastructure. It was without any doubt a war crime under the Nuremberg standard that the U.S. established in order to execute Nazis. Goldstone is not only a very distinguished Jewish jurist who has given his life to bringing people to accountability for their crimes against humanity, but also a Zionist. The Israelis have demonized him as a "self-hating Jew" because he wrote the truth instead of Israeli propaganda.[44] Democracy does not go down without a spoon full of sugar. That war should not have been allowed to go on for 8 years in the first place. It should have been oust Saddam and get out.[4] Look at charts of the S&P; the point at which Congress got adult supervision, is the exact point at which the market took off like a rocket shooting upward for 6 years, yet Clinton gets all the credit.[22] Eventually in 2000, Congress also said no to regulation. This was done by both parties but was still under Clinton. Some 10 years later, the unregulated trading caught up with companies as they ran out of money to pay their loan guarantees and some went belly up or needed bailouts. Companies such as AIG, Bank of America, etc etc were part of the bailout.[20]

Yes my wise and educated friend, (who can'''t spell or compose a sentence) (and believes a party that has lied to it'''s supporters for many years in a bait and switch scheme) you are on a level much higher than I and have demonstrated it well. [7] Be sure to read Tommy Christopher's run-down on the last year from a progressive point of view. It's the one-year mark, the anniversary of the election we are told was the most important one ever. (Well come on, they always exaggerate the night before.)[16]

Of course, pundits are wrong about half the time. It looks like Senator Vitter and Dick Armey are planning to become involved in elections in Florida, California, and Illinois.[7]

The rest of us will work to restore fiscal sanity to government, which means a lot of liberals (Democrats AND Republicans) are going to get thrown out of office. [9]

SOURCES

1. 411mania.com: Politics - Is It Possible To Change Washington?
2. Letter: Obama has big mess to clean up - Chico Enterprise Record
3. Obama backers ask: Where is change? -- baltimoresun.com
4. One year after being elected, has President Barack Obama done a good job? / LJWorld.com
5. Family Security Matters » Publications » Exclusive: Oval Office Watch Thursday, November 5
6. On presidents and shouting questions | Washington Examiner
7. First thoughts: The race to 218 - First Read - msnbc.com
8. Months into Obama's presidency, promise of 'change' is a slow go - CNN.com
9. It's the Economy. - George's Bottom Line
10. AFP: A year on, Obama says he staved off economic ruin
11. The Telegraph - Calcutta (Kolkata) | Opinion | hard reality
12. Americans Mostly Favorable on Defense Secretary Gates
13. Obama Regime: Toss NSA Warrantless Wiretapping Lawsuit
14. A dose of defeat is just the medicine for Obama | David Frum - Times Online
15. I'm Tired of Hating President Obama - FOXNews.com
16. Obama Year One in Review -- From the Right - Asylum.com
17. Was Yesterday Obama's 'Pet Goat' Moment? -- Daily Intel
18. Is Obama treating the office of the Presidency with the dignity it deserves?
19. Liberals think other Americans are extremists - Don Surber - Charleston Daily Mail - West Virginia News and Sports -
20. azdailysun.com Letters
21. OPINION Blog | The Dallas Morning News
22. Are Reports of the Dollar's Death Premature? -- Seeking Alpha
23. Obama moves quickly to preserve the West
24. Obama's Latest Use of 'Secrecy' to Shield Presidential Lawbreaking - Bulatlat
25. Goldberg: True conservatives just want to take a turn - Salt Lake Tribune
26. Democrats need to take the gloves off
27. Democrats cry foul when the truth hurts | islandpacket.com
28. The Westside Story: 49% Blame Bush for Economy, 45% Blame Obama
29. Obama should hold former Bush administration accountable - Commentary
30. Obamas first year in office | Manila Bulletin
31. Obama: One year after 'a day of hope' - The Oval: Tracking the Obama presidency
32. Eugene Robinson: Obama's strong record of hope, change | News for Dallas, Texas | Dallas Morning News | Opinion: Viewpoints
33. Punditwatch: Who Got Hurt More Last Night? - Megan McArdle
34. SBS Dateline | Obama One Year On
35. Let's put some facts on the table for Mr. Obama
36. Rave - Republican's Second Chance
37. Barack Obama's 'My Pet Goat' Moment - Erick's blog - RedState
38. Obama Gives "Shout Out" During Speech After Shooting Today - Auburn Journal
39. Dar Al Hayat
40. Don't blame Obama - Bakersfield.com
41. Why Obama is simply angry, egotistical, and dumber than George Bush
42. Obama Year One in Review -- From the Left - Asylum.com
43. EDITORIAL: Obama has a 'Pet Goat' moment - Washington Times
44. VDARE.com: 11/05/09 - Why Does The U.S. Have An Empire In Asia?
45. Kominicki, Up Front » Was that early-onset Obama fatigue? Maybe.
46. Why Democrats Must Change or Perish
47. News Blog - Times Online - WBLG: An Obama'shout out' too far?
48. The aid is a blade | Pakistan | News | Newspaper | Daily | English | Online
49. Trust: What Obama needs most
50. President Obama: Cold and Insincere
51. Crazy comparison of the day | Media Matters for America

GENERATE A MULTI-SOURCE SUMMARY ON ANY SUBJECT
Enter your search query below. WAIT 10-20 sec for the new window to open.
Get more info on Obama's to Fix by using the iResearch Reporter tool from Power Text Solutions.

Above is the automatically generated multi-source news digest.
Its main content has been compiled basing on the fair use of snippets from original news stories (initially clustered by the Google News) by applying our multi-document summarization technology. The title has been excerpted from this article, and the top image was found

CBS News

Obama's to Fix

New York Times - here.

Give Us Your Feedback!

How did you like this article?